Surya Nayak vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 9251 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                           CRLA No.694 of 2018

              Surya Nayak                       ....      Appellant/
                                                        Petitioner

                                  Mr. S.K. Nayak, Advocate

                                     -versus-

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

                                  Mr.P.B. Tripathy
                                  Addl.Standing Counsel
                                  CORAM:
                             JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
                                    ORDER

Order No. 14.08.2023

13. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical Mode). Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel has filed his appearance memo after obtaining the consent from the previously engaged counsel, which is taken on record. The name of Mr.Devashis Panda, learned counsel be reflected in the cause list as well as at the top of the brief henceforth.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge I.A. No.1234 of 2021

14. Heard learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

This is an application for bail.

The appellant-petitioner Surya Nayak has been convicted under sections 363/376(2)(i)(n) of the Indian // 2 //

Penal Code (for short, 'I.P.C.') read with section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short, 'POCSO Act') and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) and in default, to undergo R.I. for a further period of two months for the offence under section 363 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) and in default, to undergo R.I. for a further period of two months for the offence under section 376(2)(i)(n) of the I.P.C. read with section 6 of the POCSO Act and both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Parlakhemundi vide judgment and order dated 09.07.2018 passed in G.R. Case No.01 of 2017 (T.R. No.15/2017).

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was on bail during trial and after pronouncement of the judgment, he was taken into judicial custody on 09.07.2018 and thereafter, he has remained in judicial custody for four months and nine months of substantive sentence out of ten years of substantive sentenced imposed on him by the learned trial Court. Learned counsel by placing the evidence of the victim (P.W.2) and the doctor (P.W.4) further submitted that there is no clinching evidence regarding the date of birth of the victim and relying on the entry made in the school admission register, it was held that

// 3 //

the victim was minor as on the date of occurrence. The victim, however, in her evidence stated that she was having love affair with the victim and she went with the petitioner to Chennai and stayed there for three months and the petitioner kept physical relationship with her. Learned counsel further submitted that since the paper book has not been prepared yet and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail mainly on the ground that the victim seems to be minor as on the date of occurrence.

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 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 including the conditions that the petitioner shall not try to come in contact with the victim, shall not try to tamper with the

// 4 //

prosecution evidence and shall not indulge in any criminal activities while on bail.

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

The I.A. is disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge sipun

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 16-Aug-2023 11:15:37