Orissa High Court
Ashok Kumar Mohanty vs State Of Odisha on 27 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.543 of 2021
Ashok Kumar Mohanty .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. P.K. Dash, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
(Vigilance) Opp. Party
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das,
Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 27.10.2021
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Video Conferencing/Physical Mode).
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the Vigilance Department submits that
he has filed the appearance memo on 08.10.2021.
The Registry shall place the appearance memo
on record.
The name of Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, learned
Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department be
reflected in the cause list as well as at the top of the
brief.
Heard.
// 2 //
Admit.
Call for the trial Court record.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.981 of 2021
02. This is an application under Section 389 of
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Heard.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted
under sections 7 and 13(2) read with section
13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
(hereafter 'P.C. Act') and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for a period of two years for the offence under
section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the P.C.
Act and R.I. for a period of one year for the offence
under section 7 of the P.C. Act and to pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) on each count, in
default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of three
months on each count and both the substantive
sentences were directed to run concurrently by the
learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Baripada in V.G.R.
No.20 of 2012 (T.C. No.71 of 2013).
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
// 3 //
the petitioner was on bail during trial and he has never
misutilised his liberty and the substantive sentence
imposed by the learned trial Court against the
petitioner is for two years and after conviction, he has
also been released on bail by the learned trial Court
and there are good chances of success in the appeal
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 Standing Counsel for the Vigilance
Department opposed 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 sentence
imposed by the learned trial Court, the fact that the
petitioner was on bail during trial and there is no
allegation of misutilization of his liberty while on bail
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 on surrendering 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
// 4 //
Court.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.983 of 2021
03. 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.
Free copy of this order be handed over to Mr.
Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel for the
Vigilance Department.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
RKM
