Md. Tafique @ Papu vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 3573 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                            CRLA No.1104 of 2022

              Md. Tafique @ Papu                    ....      Appellant/
                                                             Petitioner

                                   Mr. Rajjeet Roy, Advocate

                                         -versus-

              State of Odisha                       ....    Respondent/
                                                            Opp. Party

                                   Mr. Rajesh Tripathy,
                                   Addl. Standing Counsel

                                   CORAM:
                              JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
                                     ORDER

Order No. 17.04.2023

I.A. No.2237 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 sections 354/376/511/506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 10 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of eight years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default, to further undergo R.I. for a period of two months for the offence under sections 376/511 of the // 2 //

Indian Penal Code, R.I. for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (rupees one thousand), in default, to further undergo R.I. for a period of seven days on each count for the offences under sections 354/506 of the Indian Penal Code and no separate sentence was awarded under section 10 of the POCSO Act in view of the provision under section 42 of the POCSO Act and the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC (POCSO), Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No.370 of 2020.

Perused the impugned judgment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was on bail during trial and there is no material on record that he has misutilised his liberty in any manner or try to tamper with the evidence. It is further submitted that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and though the two occurrences in question stated to have taken place on 21.11.2018 and 26.11.2018 but the first information report was lodged only on 17.09.2020 and the nature of evidence adduced by the victim during trial does not make out a case under sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code 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

// 3 //

considered.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of the victim (P.W.1) and further stated that the petitioner is none else than the father of the victim. Learned counsel for the State has produced the written instruction received from the Inspector in- charge of Mahila police station, Bhubaneswar UPD dated 10.04.2023 from which it appears that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and the victim is still unmarried and she is staying along with her mother in her house at Jadupur, Bhubaneswar, P.S. Khandagiri, Dist. Khurda. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that in the event the petitioner is released on bail, he will come to stay in the house at Jadupur with the victim and there is likelihood of unwanted and unpleasant situation happening during his stay. The written instruction is taken on record.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced by the prosecution during trial, the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, the fact that the petitioner was on bail during trial and there is no allegation of misutilization of his liberty while on bail and absence of any chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future and absence of any criminal antecedent, the prayer for bail is allowed.

// 4 //

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 subject to conditions that the petitioner shall not try to come in contact with the victim and he shall not enter into the house at Jadupur, P.S. Khandagiri, Dist. Khurda.

Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

I.A. No.2238 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 as per rules.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge RKM