Orissa High Court
Bishnu Charan Pradhan @ vs State Of Odisha on 9 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.194 of 2023
Bishnu Charan Pradhan @ .... Appellant/
Sanu Petitioner
Mr. B.K. Ragada, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp.Party
Mr. Manoranjan Mishra
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
09.05.2023
I.A. No. 959 of 2023
02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
This is an application for grant of bail.
The appellant-petitioner Bishnu Charan Pradhan
@ Sanu has been convicted under section 376(2)(i)
of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO
Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of
Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) and in
default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of one
// 2 //
year more for the offence under section 376(2)(i) of
the Indian Penal Code and no separate sentence has
been imposed for the offence under section 6 of the
POCSO Act by the learned Special Judge (POCSO)
-cum- Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar in T.R.
Case No. 2748 of 2017.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner is in judicial custody since
14.12.2017 and as such, he has already undergone
five years and four months of substantive sentence.
It is further submitted that the victim, who has been
examined as P.W.2 is the informant in the case, but
in the F.I.R. she has not alleged anything regarding
commission of rape on her and the doctor (P.W.6),
who examined her, has also not found any sign of
sexual intercourse on her person. It is further
submitted that though it is the prosecution case that
commission of rape was also videographed by using
secret camera and the said camera was seized
during course of investigation, the learned trial Court
has discussed the evidence of the I.O., who has
stated that he has not seized any objectionable
material in the case and there was no certification in
respect of the genuineness of the alleged video and
accordingly, the petitioner was acquitted of the
charge under sections 67E, 67A and 67B of the
Information Technology Act. Learned counsel further
// 3 //
submitted that in view of the available materials on
record and absence of chance of early hearing of the
appeal in the near future and since balance of
convenience is in his favour, 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.6).
Considering the submission made by the
learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature
of evidence adduced during trial, the sentence
imposed by the 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, I am inclined to
release the petitioner on bail.
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
P.T.O.
// 4 //
I.A. No. 960 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 18.01.2023
passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO) -cum-
Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No.
2748 of 2017 pending disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
PRAMOD Digitally signed by PRAMOD
KUMAR SAHOO ( S.K. Sahoo)
KUMAR SAHOO Date: 2023.05.11 10:44:30 +05'30'
Judge
PKSahoo
