Orissa High Court
Brahmananda Das @ vs State Of Odisha on 10 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1128 of 2022
Brahmananda Das @ .... Appellant/
Paleipua Petitioner
Mr.B. Samal, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp.Party
Mrs. Susamarani Sahoo,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 10.01.2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
Defect as pointed out by the S.R. is removed as
authentication fees of Rs.6/- has been filed. The memo filed
to that effect in Court today is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the State submits that he has
received the copy of the appeal memo along with the
impugned judgment. Therefore, the defect as pointed out by
the Stamp Reporter is removed.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the Trial Court Record.
(S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
// 2 //
I.A. No.2159 of 2022
This is an application under section 389 of Cr.P.C. for
02. grant of bail.
Heard.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
sections 448, 354-A of the Indian Penal Code read with
section 12 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for a period of one year on each count and to pay a fine of
Rs.1,000/- (one thousand), in default of payment of fine, to
undergo R.I. for one month each for the offence under
section 448 and 354-A of the Indian Penal Code and to pay
a fine of Rs.5000/- (five thousand), in default, of payment
of fine to undergo R.I. for a period of three months for the
offence under section 12 of the POCSO Act and both the
substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently by
the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge (FTSC), Kendrapara
in G.R. Case No. 105 of 2019.
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 and the substantive sentence imposed
by the learned trial Court against the petitioner is for one
year 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.
// 3 //
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 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 on surrendering 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
I.A. No.2160 of 2022
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 on proper
application.
p ( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
