Orissa High Court
Bhaskar Behera vs State Of Odisha on 28 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1127 of 2022
1. Bhaskar Behera
2. Nityananda Behera
3. Pravakar Behera
4. Goutam Behera .... Appellants/
Petitioners
Mr. R.K. Pattanaik, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mrs. Susamarani Sahoo
Addl. Standing Counsel
Mr. S.K. Pattnaik, Advocate for
the informant
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 28.02.2023
I.A. No.2183 of 2022
02. 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 appellants-petitioners have been convicted
under sections 323/324/326/307/506/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of
// 2 //
six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (rupees one
thousand) each, in default, to undergo R.I. for a period
one month for the offence under section 323/34 of the
Indian Penal Code, R.I. for a period of two years and to
pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees three thousand) each, in
default, to undergo R.I. for a period two months for the
offence under section 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code,
R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) each, in default, to
undergo R.I. for a period six months for the offence
under section 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code, R.I. for a
period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-
(rupees five thousand) each, in default, to undergo R.I.
for a period six months for the offence under section
307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for a period of
two years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees three
thousand) each, in default, to undergo R.I. for a period
two months for the offence under section 506/34 of the
Indian Penal Code and all the substantive sentences were
directed to run concurrently by the learned 1st Additional
Sessions Judge, Khordha in S.T. Case No.79 of 2015.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
the petitioners were on bail during trial and they have
never misutilised their liberty. It is further submitted that
though there are six injured persons in this case i.e.
P.Ws.1, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12, but except P.W.9, all other
// 3 //
injured have sustained simple injuries and P.W.9 has
sustained only one grievous injury as stated by the
doctor (P.W.18) and no specific overt act has been
attributed against the petitioners nos.2, 3 and 4 and
there is no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near
future and balance of convenience is in favour of the
petitioners and therefore, the bail application of the
petitioners may be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State placed the evidence of
the doctor (P.W.18) and the injured (P.W.9).
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for
the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced by
the prosecution during trial, the sentence imposed by the
learned trial Court, the fact that the petitioners were on
bail during trial and there is no allegation of misutilization
of their liberty while on bail and absence of any chance of
early hearing of the appeal in the near future, the prayer
for bail is allowed.
Let the appellants-petitioners be released on bail
pending disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) each 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
// 4 //
I.A. No.2184 of 2022
03. Heard.
There shall be stay of realization of fine amount
imposed by the learned trial Court on the appellants-
petitioners till disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
RKM
