Orissa High Court
Jhampa @ Maheswar Rout vs State Of Odisha & Another on 5 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1130 of 2022
Jhampa @ Maheswar Rout .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. S. Pattanayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Respondent/
Opp. Parties
Mrs. Susamarani Sahoo
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 05.04.2023
03. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
Learned counsel for the State has produced the
written instruction dated 12.02.2023 received from the
Inspector in-charge of Satyabadi Police Station from
which it appears that notice could not be served on the
informant as she has left the village since eight to ten
years back and staying somewhere with her husband and
nobody could disclose the whereabouts of the informant.
The written instruction is taken on record.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
// 2 //
I.A. No.2161 of 2022
04. This is an application for bail.
The appellant-petitioner Jhampa @ Maheswar Rout
has been convicted for the offences punishable under
sections 341/323/354/506 of the Indian Penal Code and
section 3(1)(xi) of the S.C. & S.T. (PA) Act and
sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period
of one month for the offence under section 341 of the
Indian Penal Code, to undergo simple imprisonment for
a period of three months for the offence under section
323 of the Indian Penal Code, to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a
fine of Rs.2,000/-(rupees two thousand), in default, to
undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of
one month for the offence under section 354 of the
Indian Penal Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of six months and to pay a fine of
Rs.3,000/-(rupees three thousand), in default, to
undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of
one month for the offence under section 506 of the
Indian Penal Code and to undergo simple imprisonment
for a period of six months and to pay a fine of
Rs.3,000/-(rupees three thousand), in default, to
undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one
month for the offence under section 3(1)(xi) of the S.C.
& S.T. (PA) Act and all the sentences were directed to
run concurrently by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions
Judge, Puri vide judgment and order dated 29.11.2022
// 3 //
in S.T. Case No.78/348 of 2016.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner was on bail during trial and that there is
no chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near
future and balance of convenience is in his favour and
therefore, the bail application may be favouraly
considered.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, the nature of
evidence adduced during trial, the substantive sentence
imposed on the petitioner by the learned trial Court 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.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
// 4 //
I.A. No. 2162 of 2022
05. This is an application for stay of realization of fine.
Heard.
There shall be stay of realization of fine amount
imposed on the appellant-petitioner pursuant to the
judgment and order dated 29.11.2022 passed 1st Addl.
Sessions Judge, Puri in S.T. Case No.78/348 of 2016
pending disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue certified copy as per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
Sipun
