Orissa High Court
Chhabilal Sahu vs State Of Odisha on 21 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.250 of 2022
Chhabilal Sahu .... Appellant
Mr. S. Dwibedi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent
Mrs. Susamarani Sahoo,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
21.09.2022
I.A. No.510 of 2022
03. 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(2)(1)/511/452 of the Indian Penal
Code read with section 18 of the POCSO Act and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years and to pay a
fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees three thousand), in
default, to undergo R.I. for four months for the
offence under section 376(1) read with section 511 of
the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I.
// 2 //
for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- (two
thousand), in default, to undergo further R.I. for two
years for the offence under section 452 of the Indian
Penal Code and no separate sentence has been
awarded for the offence under section 18 of the
POCSO Act and all the substantive sentences were
directed to run concurrently by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge -cum- Special Court under POCSO
Act, Bhawanipatna in C.T. Case No.44 of 2016/T.R.
No.54 of 2020.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner was on bail during trial and he has
never misutilised his liberty and the evidence of the
doctor (P.W.10) contradicts the evidence of the victim
(P.W.2) and there is delay of six days in lodging the
F.I.R. and there are good chances of success in the
appeal and balance of convenience is in favour of the
petitioner and there is no chance of early hearing of
appeal in the near future 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 evidence of the victim (P.W.2) as
well as the doctor (P.W.10).
Considering the submissions of learned counsel
for the respective parties, the nature of evidence
adduced by the prosecution during trial and the fact
// 3 //
that the petitioner was on bail during trial and there is
no material on record that he has misutilised his
liberty in any manner 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 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
Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.511 of 2022
04. 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
