Orissa High Court
Sameer @ Samira Prusty vs State Of Odisha on 10 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.353 of 2023
Sameer @ Samira Prusty .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. P.R. Singh, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Rajesh Tripathy
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 10.05.2023
I.A. No.765 of 2023
02. 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(1)/452/506 of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of seven years
and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand),
in default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of four
months for the offence under section 376(1) of the
// 2 //
Indian Penal Code, R.I. for a period of three years and to
pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in
default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of two
months for the offence under section 452 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
all the sentences were directed to run concurrently by
the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC
(POCSO), Jagatsinghpur in C.T. No.196 of 2012.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner was on bail during trial and he has never
misutilised his liberty while on bail. The copy of the bail
order is filed, which is taken on record. Learned counsel
further submitted that the maximum sentence imposed
by the learned trial Court against the petitioner is for
seven years and there is no chance of early hearing of
appeal in the near future. It is further submitted by
placing the evidence of the victim and other relevant
witnesses that there are good chances of success in the
appeal and balance of convenience is in favour of the
petitioner and therefore, the bail application of the
petitioner may be favourably considered. It is argued
that at the initial stage, when the first information report
was lodged, there was no accusation of commission of
rape and it is the case under attempt to commit rape and
charge sheet was also submitted but thereafter, the
// 3 //
victim filed a complaint petition alleging commission of
rape on her, which was forwarded to Paradeep Lock
police station and accordingly, the second case was
registered and both the cases were tagged and trial was
conducted.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer
for bail and placed the evidence of the victim (P.W.1),
who is a married lady so also the evidence of the doctor
(P.W.6).
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for
the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced by
the prosecution during trial and 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
I.A. No.764 of 2023
03. Heard.
// 4 //
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: 2023.05.12
MISHRA 15:02:11 +05'30'
