Santosh @ Bipin Mohanty vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 5131 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                            CRLA No.1167 of 2022

              Santosh @ Bipin Mohanty            ....   Appellant/
                                                      Petitioner

                                    Mr. B.R. Dalai, Advocate

                                      -versus-

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

                                   Mr. Rajesh Tripathy
                                   Addl. Standing Counsel

                                      CORAM:
                                 JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

                                     ORDER

Order No. 04.05.2023

I.A. No.2256 of 2022

04. 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 376(2)(i)/312/506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand), in default, to further undergo R.I. for a period of six months for the // 2 //

offence under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code, R.I. for a period of two years for the offence under section 312 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for a period of two years for the offence under section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and no separate sentence was awarded under section 6 of the POCSO Act in view of the provision under section 42 of the POCSO Act and the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC (POCSO), Jagatsinghpur in Special G.R. No.73 of 2016.

Perused the impugned judgment. Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 30.07.2016 and as such out of ten years of substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, he has already undergone six years and nine months and there are good chances of success in the appeal and balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner and there is no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near future 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.2) and the doctor (P.W.13).

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.2257 of 2022

05. 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

RABINDRA Digitally signed by RABINDRA KUMAR KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2023.05.06 MISHRA 13:00:41 +05'30'