Orissa High Court
Punian Bhoi @ Prasant vs State Of Odisha on 17 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 315 of 2021
1. Punian Bhoi @ Prasant .... Appellants/
2. Patu Khan @ Sahajahan Petitioners
Mr.R.K. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp.Party
Mr.D.K. Pani,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 17.05.2022
I.A. No. 478 of 2022
14. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video
conferencing/physical mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the State.
The appellants-petitioners have been convicted under
sections 394, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to
pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) each and in default, to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months for
the offence under section 394 of the Indian Penal Code, to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to
pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (one thousand) each and in default, to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month for the
offence under section 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and both
// 2 //
the sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned
3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar in Crl. Trial No. 54 of
2017.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the bail
application of the appellants was earlier rejected in I.A. No. 611
of 2021 as per order dated 21.02.2022, however, it was
observed that if after serving half of the substantive sentence,
the appeal is not taken up for hearing by the end of this year, the
appellants are at liberty to renew their prayer for bail. Learned
counsel further submitted that the previous advocate, who was
conducting the case, has not pointed out about the detention
period of the appellants though the appellants have already
undergone four years and six months out of five years of
substantive sentence imposed on them and therefore, the bail
application may be favourably reconsidered.
Learned counsel for the State has produced the custody
certificate of the appellants from which it appears that each of
the appellants has already undergone four years and six months
of substantive sentence. The custody certificates are taken on
record.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel
for the respective parties, the sentence imposed by the learned
trial Court and the period already undergone by the appellants
and absence of any chance of early hearing of the appeal in near
future, I am inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail and
accordingly direct release of the appellants on bail.
// 3 //
Let the appellants-petitioners be released on bail pending
disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-
(rupees fifty thousand) each with two solvent local sureties each
for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
on such terms and conditions as the learned Court in seisin over
the matter may deem just and proper.
I.A. is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No. 700 of 2022
15. This is an application for a direction to the registry to list the
matter next week.
In view of the order passed today, no order need be passed
in this interim application.
The I.A. stands disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
PKSahoo
