Mantu @ Jogendra Nayak vs State Of Odisha
2021 Latest Caselaw 271 Ori

                               CRLA No.375 of 2019




                    Mantu @ Jogendra Nayak                 ...     Appellant

                                                     -VERSUS-

                    State of Odisha                        ...   Respondent


                                     I.A. No.898 of 2019

05.   07.01.2021         The    matter    is    taken      up    through     Video
                   Conferencing.
                         This is an application for grant of bail.

                         Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
                   counsel for the State and learned counsel for the victim.

                         The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
                   sections 376(2)(f)/506 of the Indian Penal Code and
                   sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay fine
                   of Rs.5,000/-(rupees five thousand), in default, to
                   undergo R.I. for six months for the offence under
                   section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code, to undergo
                   R.I. for six months for the offence under section 506 of
                   the Indian Penal Code and the substantive sentences
                   were directed to run concurrently by the learned
                   Assistant Sessions Judge, (S.T.C.), Baripada in Sessions
                   Trial Case No.107 of 2017.

                         Perused the impugned judgment.

                         Learned    counsel    for   the     petitioner-appellant
                   submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and
                   he has never misutilised his liberty. He further submits
                   that the appellant has good chances of success in the
                   appeal and balance of convenience is in his favour and
         there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal and
        therefore,       the    bail   application   may   be   favourably
        considered.

               Learned counsel for the State on the other hand
        opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of
        the victim examined as P.W.5 and the doctor examined
        as P.W.9.

               Learned counsel for the informant placed the
        affidavit filed by the mother of the appellant as well as
        the victim and he stated that the victim is ready and
        willing to marry the appellant and the mother of the
        appellant has also stated that the appellant is willing to
        marry the victim.

               Considering the submissions made by the learned
        counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence
        available on record and the fact that the appellant was
        on bail during trial and absence of any chance of early
        hearing of appeal in the near future and the affidavits
        filed by the victim as well as the mother of the appellant,
        I am inclined to release the appellant on bail.

               Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail
        pending disposal of the appeal on furnishing personal
        bond        of         Rs.20,000/- (rupees     twenty thousand)
        with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the
        satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
                 The I.A. is disposed of.

                                                     .............................
Sisir                                                  S.K. Sahoo, J.