Mrutunjaya Dash vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 1621 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                             CRLA No.191 of 2023

              Mrutunjaya Dash                    ....    Appellant/
                                                       Petitioner

                                   Mr. S.S. Ray-2, Advocate

                                      -versus-

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

                                   Mr. Rajesh Tripathy
                                   Addl. Standing Counsel

                                      CORAM:
                                 JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

                                     ORDER

Order No. 21.02.2023

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

Heard.

Admit.

Call for the trial Court record.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

I.A. No.395 of 2023

02. This is an application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.

for grant of bail.

// 2 //

Heard.

The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of five 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 by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC) under POCSO Act, Berhampur in G.R. Case No.163 of 2019/ T.R. No.109 of 2021 (FTSC).

Perused the impugned judgment. Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner submitted that the petitioner was taken into judicial custody in connection with this case on 09.12.2019 and except for the period from 09.05.2022 to 15.05.2022, he was all along in judicial custody and as such out of five years of substantive sentence, he has remained in custody for more than three years and there is no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near future and balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced during the trial, the substantive sentence imposed by the

// 3 //

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, the prayer for bail is allowed.

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.

Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

I.A. No.394 of 2023

03. 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

// 4 //