Kalia Naik @ Tera vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 2668 Ori

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                          CRLA No.1132 of 2022

              Kalia Naik @ Tera                ....      Appellant

                                Mr. S. Choudhury, Advocate

                                    -versus-
              1. State of Odisha
                                               ....   Respondents
              2. Laxmi Das


                                Mrs. Susamarani Sahoo,
                                Addl. Standing Counsel

                                 CORAM:
                             JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
                                   ORDER

Order No. 03.04.2023 I.A. No.2171 of 2022

02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under sections 376(2)(l) and 458 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for further period of six months for the offence under section 376(2)(l) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (rupees one thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for a further period of three months of the offence under section 458 of the Indian Penal Code and both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned 2nd Addl.

// 2 //

Sessions Judge, Cuttack in S.T. Case No.185 of 2018.

Perused the impugned judgment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 19.01.2018 and thus out of ten years of substantive sentence, the petitioner has already undergone five years and two months of substantive sentence and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future and balance of convenience is in his favour and the victim could not be examined during trail as she died and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favouraly considered.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of (P.W.1) who is the niece of the victim and also the doctor (P.W.12).

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced during trial, the substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, the sentence already undergone by the appellant in judicial custody and absence of any chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

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 solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with such terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper.

// 3 //

The I.A. is disposed of.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

p