Orissa High Court
Alok Maharana vs State Of Odisha on 8 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.416 of 2023
Alok Maharana .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr.R.C. Pradhan, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp.Party
Mr.P.B. Tripathy
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 08.08.2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Heard Mr. R.C. Pradhan, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner through Virtual High Court
at Ganjam, Berhampur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
defect No.5(e) regarding deposit of Rs.50/- towards
High Court Bar Association Advocate's Welfare fees
has already been complied with and thus, defect as
pointed out by the Stamp Reporter is removed.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that he
has not received a copy of the impugned judgment.
However, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
// 2 //
that he has already sent the same through e-mail to
the office of the learned Advocate General.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the trial Court records.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.903 of 2023
02. This is an application for bail.
The appellant-petitioner Alok Maharana has
been convicted under section 363 of the Indian Penal
Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a
fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default,
to undergo further R.I. for a period of three by the
learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (FTSC) under
POCSO Act, Berhampur in G.R. Case No.38 of
2020/T.R. No. 53 of 2022(FTSC).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that though the petitioner faced trial for commission
of offences under sections 366/376(2)(n)/376(3)/
305 of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the
POCSO Act, but he has been acquitted of such
charges, however, he was only found guilty for the
offence under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner
is in judicial custody since 26.06.2020 and as such,
// 3 //
he has already undergone more than three years of
substantive sentence out of five years imposed by
the learned trial Court. It is further submitted that
there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in
the near future and balance of convenience lies in his
favour 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.
Considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the respective parties, the period
of sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, the
period already undergone by the petitioner 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. Violation of any of the conditions shall
entail cancellation of bail.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
// 4 //
I.A. No. 901 of 2023
03. 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
order dated 24.03.2023 passed by the learned Ad hoc
Addl. Sessions Judge (FTSC) under POCSO Act,
Berhampur in G.R. Case No.38 of 2020/T.R. No. 53 of
2022(FTSC) pending disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue certified copy as per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
PKSahoo
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PRAMOD KUMAR SAHOO
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Date: 09-Aug-2023 15:41:57
