Kunnu Pujhari vs State Of Odisha
2022 Latest Caselaw 441 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                              CRLREV No.536 of 2021

            Kunnu Pujhari                           ....             Petitioner

                                              Mr. P.K. Satapathy, Advocate

                                        -versus-

            State of Odisha                        ....        Opposite Party

                                                   Mr. M.K. Mohanty, ASC

                        CORAM:

                        JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
                                 ORDER

20.01.2022 Order No. CRLREV No.536 of 2021 and I.A. No.761 of 2021

01. 1. The matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.

2. Heard.

3. An extra copy of both the petitions be served on learned counsel for the State within three working days hence, who shall obtain instructions in the matter and file a short written note of submission on the next date.

4. Call for the Trial Court Record.

5. In the meantime, learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to deposit cost of paper book.

// 2 //

6. List this matter on 03.03.2022.

                                                        (S.K. Panigrahi)
                                                             Judge
Order No.                  I.A. No.762 of 2021

02. 1. This is an application for bail under Sections 389 and 397 of the Cr.P.C. read with Chapter VI Rule 27(a) of Orissa High Court Rule.

2. This I.A. is filed by the petitioner for grant of bail.

3. The petitioner assails the judgment dated 25.05.2004 passed by the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Sundergarh in Criminal Appeal No.66/12 of 2001-2004, who allowed the appeal in part by setting aside the conviction under Section 307 of the IPC and confirmed the conviction under Section 354 of the IPC passed by the C.J.M.-cum-A.S.J., Sundergarh in Sessions Trial No.83/24 of 1999 sentencing the petitioner to undergo imprisonment for one year.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was on bail during the trial, and during the pendency of the appeal. He has never misutilized the liberty granted to him during the bail period.

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions and the facts of the case, it is directed that the petitioner-Kunnu Pujhari be released on bail in S.T. Case No.83/24 of 1999 by the C.J.M.-cum- A.S.J., Sundargarh till the next date.

// 3 //

6. As the restrictions due to resurgence of Covid-19 are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a print out of the order available in the High Court's website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the Advocate concerned with his/her seal, in the manner prescribed vide Court's Office Order dated 7th January, 2022.

(S.K. Panigrahi) Judge

pcd