Orissa High Court
Shabir Ali vs State Of Odisha on 21 January, 2021
CRLA No.383 of 2016
1
I.A. No.1178 of 2020
Shabir Ali ... Appellant/
Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ... Respondent/
Opp. party
12. 21.01.2021 The matter is taken up through Video
Conferencing.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that as
per the previous order dated 17.12.2020, he has
obtained instruction that the victim is now prosecuting
her study in Class-VIII.
This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C.
for grant of bail.
Heard.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted
under sections 376(2)(i)(n)/506 of the Indian Penal
Code read with section 6 of the POCSO Act and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay a
fine of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand), in
default, to undergo R.I. for two years for the offence
under section 376(2)(i)(n) of the Indian Penal Code
and R.I. for one year for the offence under section 506
of the Indian Penal Code and no separate punishment is
awarded under section 6 of the POCSO Act in view of
section 42 of the POCSO Act and both the substantive
sentences were directed to run concurrently by the
2
learned Judge, Special Court, Angul in Special (POCSO)
Case No.128 of 2014.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner is in judicial custody since 07.12.2014
and out of ten years of substantive sentence imposed
by the learned trial Court, the petitioner has already
undergone more than six years of the substantive
sentence and there is no chance of early hearing of
appeal in the near future and balance of convenience is
in favour of the petitioner, and therefore, the bail
application of the petitioner may be favourably
considered.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer
for bail.
It appears that the earlier bail application of the
petitioner in Misc. Case No.1078 of 2016 was rejected
as per order dated 20.04.2018 and it was observed
that if the matter is not taken up for hearing even after
the petitioner has served the half of the substantive
sentence imposed, the petitioner is at liberty to renew
the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel
for the respective parties, the nature of evidence
adduced by the prosecution during trial, the
substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial
Court, the period already undergone by the petitioner
and absence of any chance of early hearing of the
3
appeal in the near future, the prayer for bail is allowed.
Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail
pending disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with two local
solvent sureties each for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court. While on bail,
the petitioner shall not try to come in contact with the
victim or her family members.
Violation of any terms and conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
The I.A. is disposed of.
.............................
S.K. Sahoo, J.
RKM
