Orissa High Court
Manoj Saha vs State Of Odisha & on 28 January, 2021
CRLA No. 582 of 2020
1
MANOJ SAHA ... APPELLANT
-VERSUS-
STATE OF ODISHA & ... RESPONDENTS
ANOTHER
I.A. No. 1128 of 2020
02. 28.01.2021 This is an application for condonation of delay.
Since the Stamp Reporter has not pointed out any
delay in filing the CRLA, this interim application is
disposed of.
.............................
S.K. Sahoo, J.
CRLA No. 582 of 2020
03. 28.01.2021 Heard
Admit
Call for L.C.R.
.............................
S.K. Sahoo, J.
I.A. No. 1130 of 2020
04. 28.01.2021 This is an application for grant of bail.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the State.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
sections 341 and 354-A(i)(iv) of the Indian Penal Code
and section 12 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month
for the offence under section 341 of the Indian Penal
Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years
and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (rupees two thousand),
in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further
six months for the offence under section 354-A(i) of the
Indian Penal Code and to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one year for the offence under section
354-A (iv) of the Indian Penal Code and no separate
punishment has been awarded under section 12 of
POCSO Act in view of section 42 of the POCSO Act and
the substantive sentences were directed to run
concurrently by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum-
Special Judge, Sundargarh in Special G.R. Case No. 61
of 2015.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the appellant-petitioner was on bail during trial and he
has never misutilized the liberty while on bail and after
pronouncement of the judgment i.e. on 24.02.2020, the
petitioner is still in judicial custody and there is no
chance of early hearing of appeal in the near future and
the 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.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, the period of
detention of the petitioner in judicial custody after the
pronouncement of the judgment and the fact that the
petitioner was on bail during trial and he never
misutilized the liberty granted to him, absence of any
chance of early hearing of appeal in the near future and
the balance of convenience is in favour of the
petitioner, I am inclined to release the petitioner on
bail.
Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail
pending disposal of the appeal on furnishing 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.
The I.A. is disposed of.
.............................
S.K. Sahoo, J.
I.A. No. 1129 of 2020
05. 28.01.2021 Heard.
There shall be stay of realization of fine
amount imposed by the learned trial Court on the
appellant-petitioner till disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue certified copy as per rules.
.............................
S.K. Sahoo, J.
PKSahoo
