Orissa High Court
Sukanta Mallick vs State Of Odisha on 28 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1006 of 2022
Sukanta Mallick .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. D. Tripathy, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mrs. Susamarani Sahoo
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 28.02.2023
I.A. No.1884 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 366/376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of five years and
to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in
default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of six months
for the offence under section 366 of the Indian Penal
// 2 //
Code and R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine
of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default, to
undergo further R.I. for a period of one year for the
offence under section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code
and both the substantive sentences were directed to run
concurrently by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions
Judge (Fast Track Special Court), Kendrapara in G.R.
Case No.129 of 2017.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner was on bail during trial and he has never
misutilised his liberty in any manner and there are good
chances of success in the appeal 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 and placed the evidence of the victim (P.W.7),
who stated that the petitioner alone took her to
Bangalore by a train and she stayed in the brother's
house of the petitioner where the sister-in-law of the
petitioner was also there and there the petitioner kept
physical relationship with her. Learned counsel for the
State also placed the evidence of the doctor (P.W.8).
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for
// 3 //
the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced by
the prosecution during trial and 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, 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.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.1886 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
// 4 //
