Orissa High Court
Bansidhar vs State Of Odisha (Vig.) on 8 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.485 of 2023
Bansidhar .... Appellant/
[email protected] petitioner
Mahapatra
Mr.Ramdas Achary, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha (Vig.) .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Das
Standing Counsel(Vig.)
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 08.05.2023
CRLA No. 485 of 2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical Mode).
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dash, learned Standing Counsel
for the Vigilance Department submitted that he has
received the copy of the appeal memo along with the
copies of the impugned judgment and interim application.
He undertakes to file his appearance memo during this
week.
Heard.
Admit
Call for the trial Court records.
// 2 //
List this matter indicating the name of Mr. Sanjay
Kumar Dash, learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance
Department on the top of the brief as well as in the cause
list henceforth.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.1071 of 2023
02. This is an application for bail.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner
and learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance
Department.
The appellant-petitioner Bansidhar [email protected]
Banshidhar Mahapatra has been convicted under
sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three years
and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/-(rupees twenty
thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for a further
period of six months for the offence under section 420 of
the Indian Penal Code, to undergo R.I. for a period of
three years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- (rupees
twenty thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for a
further period of six months for the offence under
section 468 of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo R.I.
for a period of three years and to pay a fine of
Rs.20,000/-(rupees twenty thousand), in default, to
undergo R.I. for a further period of six months for the
// 3 //
offence under section 471 of the Indian Penal Code and
all the sentences were directed to run concurrently by
the learned Addl. Special Judge (Vigilance),
Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No.12 of 2012.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was on bail during trial and he was also on bail
after conviction and has never misutilized the liberty
granted to him and therefore, the petitioner may be
directed to be released on bail pending disposal of the
appeal.
Learned counsel for the Vigilance Department
opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence
adduced by the prosecution during trial, the sentence
imposed by the learned trial Court and absence of any
chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future,
I am inclined to release the petitioner.
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 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
// 4 //
I.A. No. 1072 of 2023
03. This is an application for stay of realization of fine.
Heard.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties, let there be stay of realization of
fine amount imposed on the appellant-petitioner pursuant
to the judgment and order dated 12.04.2023 passed by
the learned Addl. Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar
in T.R. Case No.12 of 2012 pending disposal of the
criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
Free copy of the order be supplied to the learned
counsel for the Vigilance Department.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
Sipun
Digitally signed
SIPUN byBEHERA
SIPUN
BEHERA Date: 2023.05.10
10:20:56 +05'30'
