Orissa High Court
Prasant Samal vs State Of Odisha on 8 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 81 of 2020
Prasant Samal .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr.P.S. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. A.K. Beura, Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
08.11.2021
I.A. No. 178 of 2020
05. The matter is taken up through Video
Conferencing.
This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for
grant of bail.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Standing Counsel for the State.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of
the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a
period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- (one
thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for a period of
three months for the offence under section 506 of the
// 2 //
Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a
period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-
(rupees ten thousand), in default, to undergo further
R.I. for a period of six months for the offence under
section 6 of the POCSO Act and both the substantive
sentences were directed to run the concurrently by the
learned Special Judge (POCSO), Angul in Special POCSO
No.96 of 2013.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner was on bail during trial and he has never
misutilised his liberty while on bail and after conviction
he is in judicial custody and as such he was remained in
custody for total period of more than two years and
there is no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near
future. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed the
evidence of the victim (P.W.1), which indicates that
there was love affairs between the victim and the
petitioner and even the victim has stated in her evidence
that her marriage proposal with the petitioner was fixed
and from the very beginning the father of the petitioner
was objecting to their marriage proposal and invitation
card was also printed and sent to the delegates and on
20.03.2013 which was stated to be the date of
occurrence, their marriage proposal was broken by the
family of the petitioner and meeting was convened and
they went to police station to lodge the first information
report after four days and they waited for about four
days as they were expecting a settlement in the village.
The victim further stated that she had already married to
// 3 //
another person and she had a ten months old son and
she did not want to proceed with the case and she has
no objection if the appellant is enlarged on bail. Learned
counsel further submitted that the doctor who examined
the victim has found no bodily injury suggestive of
forcibly sexual intercourse and there was no physical
clue of sexual offence and no sign or symptoms of recent
sexual intercourse. P.W.3, who is the mother of the
victim also stated that she found the victim and the
appellant in a compromising position in the backyard of
the house and when she challenged the petitioner, the
petitioner pushed her for which she fell down on the
ground. Learned counsel further submits that in view of
the available material on record that the petitioner has
good chance of success in the appeal 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 and placed the relevant parts of the impugned
judgment to show that the victim was minor at the time of
occurrence.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for
the respective parties, nature of evidence adduced during
trial, the substantive sentence imposed by the learned
trial Court, the period already undergone by the petitioner
and the fact that there is no material that the petitioner
misutilised his liberty while on bail during trial and
absence of any chance of early hearing of the appeal in
// 4 //
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.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No. 177 of 2019
07. 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.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
P
