Orissa High Court
Pradeep Kumar Rout vs State Of Odisha (Vig.) on 25 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 87 of 2023
Pradeep Kumar Rout .... Appellant
Mr. Debasis Sarangi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha (Vig.) .... Respondent
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das,
Standing Counsel (Vig.)
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
25.01.2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the Vigilance Department submitted that
he has received the copy of the appeal memo along
with the impugned judgment and interim applications
for bail and stay realization of fine and he will file his
appearance memo by 20.02.2023.
In case such appearance memo is filed, the same
be taken on record and the name of Mr. Sanjay Kumar
Das, learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance
Department shall be reflected in the cause list as well
as at the top of the brief.
Heard.
// 2 //
Admit.
Call for the trial Court record.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the Vigilance Department submits that
some of the co-accused persons who were convicted
with the appellant preferred separate criminal appeals
i.e., CRLA No. 30 of 2023 and CRLA No.1226 of 2022
and in both the matters, the trial Court record has
been called for and the said co-accused persons have
been released on bail.
Registry shall verify whether the trial Court
Record has been received in the aforesaid two cases
or not.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No. 182 of 2023
02. This is an application under section 389 of
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Heard.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted
under sections 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of
the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sections
468, 471, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code
and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period three
years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty
thousand) on each count in default, to undergo R.I.
// 3 //
for a period of six months more each and all the
sentences were directed to run concurrently by the
learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar in
T.R. Case No. 09 of 2019.
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 three years and after conviction,
he has also been released on bail by the learned trial
Court 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 Standing Counsel for the Vigilance
Department opposed the prayer for bail.
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.
// 4 //
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) 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. 183 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.
A free copy of this order be handed over to Mr.
Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel for the
Vigilance Department.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
