CRLA/460/2018
2021 Latest Caselaw 6339 Ori

                                   CRLA NO.460 OF 2018




                                I.A. NO.1126 OF 2018
16. 11.06.2021:         This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
                        The Appellant by filing this Appeal has challenged the
                  judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the
                  learned Additional Sessions Judge -cum-Special Judge,
                  Nabarangpur in C.T. Case No. 102 of 2015. The Appellant
                  facing the trial for commission of offence under Section-
                  363/366/376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section-6 of the POCSO Act
                  has been convicted thereunder and he has been sentenced as
                  follows:-
                        (i)     R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.2,000/- in default,
                                R.I. for 15 days for offence under Section-363 of
                                the IPC;
                        (ii)    R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.5,000/- in default,
                                R.I. for one month for offence under Section-366
                                of the IPC;
                        (iii)   R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default,
                                R.I. for two months for offence under Section-
                                376(2)(n) of the IPC; and
                        (iv)    R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default,
                                R.I. for two months for offence under Section-6 of
                                the POCSO Act.
                        Learned counsel for the Appellant placing the deposition
                  of the victim, (P.W.3) and other witnesses as also drawing the
                  attention of the Court to the documentary evidence on record
                        // 2 //




submits that there is every chance of success in this Appeal. He
further submits that as per the prosecution case, the Victim and
the Appellant together first went in an Auto Rickshaw to one
village where they stayed for three days and thereafter they
went to another village and stayed there for quite some time
and then returned to village where they had first stayed.
According to him, under the circumstances, the version of the
victim that the Appellant raped her is not acceptable. He further
submits that the finding as to the age of the victim rendered by
the Trial Court is against the weight of evidence on record and
it is a clear case of consensual sex. He further submits that the
Appellant had remained in custody for about a year during the
Trial and then again since 14.05.2018 which comes around four
years by now. It is submitted that for such long detention of the
Appellant in custody besides the sufferings caused to him, his
family members have been facing a lot of problem in running
their living especially during this period due to Pandemic
COVID-19. It is his submission that in view of long period of
detention of the Appellant in custody and the suffering caused
to him, his detention till disposal of the Appeal which is not
expected under the situation to be so soon, would serve no
useful purpose particularly when there remains no scope on the
part of the Appellant to flee from justice: He, therefore, prays
for suspension of the execution of the custodial sentence
                         // 3 //




imposed upon the Appellant and grant of bail to the Appellant
pending disposal of the Appeal.
      Learned counsel for the State submits that the evidence
on record being re-appreciated from all angles provide full
justification in favour of confirmation of guilt recorded against
the Appellant. He further submits that the finding of the Trial
Court overruling the case of "consent" has been arrived at upon
just and proper appreciation of evidence. He however does not
dispute the position that the Appellant has remained in custody
for about four years.
      Considering the submission made and further keeping in
view the long period of detention of the Appellant in custody
and other surrounding circumstances; it is ordered that let there
be suspension of execution of the sentence as imposed by the
Trial Court upon the Appellant pending disposal of this
Appeal. Accordingly, it is further directed that the Appellant be
released on bail on such terms and conditions as would be
deemed just and proper by the Trial Court with further
condition that he shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial
Court at a stretch more than three days without prior
permission of the said Court.
      The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.


                                       ..........................
                                          D. Dash, J.

// 4 //

CRLA NO. 460 OF 2018

17. 11.06.2021: List this matter after six weeks.

As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court's website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed, vide Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court's Notice No.4798 dated 15th April, 2021.

..........................

D. Dash, J.

Narayan