Panchu Santara vs State Of Odisha
2021 Latest Caselaw 11937 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                           CRLA No.380 of 2017

              Panchu Santara                        ....       Appellant

                                   Mr. A.K. Sahoo, Advocate

                                         -versus-
              State of Odisha                       ....    Respondent

                                   Mr. J.P. Patra,
                                   Addl. Standing Counsel
                                    CORAM:

                             JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
                                    ORDER

Order No.                          22.11.2021

                             I.A. No.1054 of 2021

  05.            This     matter    is     taken    up    through   Hybrid

Arrangement (Video Conferencing/Physical Mode).

This is an application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

Heard.

The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees three thousand), in default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of one year by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge (S.T.C.), Deogarh in Sessions Trial No.27/04 of 2016.

// 2 //

Perused the impugned judgment.

Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.12.2015 and therefore, out of ten years of substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, he has almost undergone substantive sentence of six years and till date, no paper book has been prepared and therefore, there is no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near future. Placing the evidence of the victim, he submitted that there are good chances 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 submitted that the doctor, who has examined the victim has found the evidence of forcible intercourse on the next day of occurrence and though the victim stated in her cross- examination that she had no prior acquaintance with the petitioner but she identified him during trial and in view of the evidence particularly her age, the petitioner should not be released on 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 and the period already undergone by the

// 3 //

petitioner in judicial custody and absence of any chance of early hearing of the 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.

The I.A. is disposed of.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge Misc. Case No.996 of 2017

06. 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 Misc. Case is disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge RKM