Orissa High Court
Pradeep Kumar vs State Of Odisha on 10 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.358 of 2023
Pradeep Kumar .... Appellant/
Choudhury Petitioner
Mr. K.N. Pattnaik, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
(Vigilance) Opp. Party
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das
Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 10.05.2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
The Stamp Reporter has pointed out that in
paragraph-6, the judgment date has been incorrectly
reflected.
Learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission
to correct the same.
Permission is granted.
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
// 2 //
memo by end of this month.
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.
Admit.
Call for the trial Court record.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.775 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
section 7 of the P.C. Act, 1988 amended by Act 16 of
2018 sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of four
years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-(rupees ten
thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for a further
period of six months by the learned Special Judge
(Vigilance), Phulbani in G.R. Case No.12 of 2018(v)/T.R.
No.03 of 2021.
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
// 3 //
imposed by the learned trial Court against the petitioner
is for four years and after conviction, he was taken into
judicial custody 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.
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.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
// 4 //
I.A. No.774 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
RKM
RABINDRA Digitally signed
by RABINDRA
KUMAR KUMAR MISHRA
Date: 2023.05.12
MISHRA 15:02:53 +05'30'
