Orissa High Court
Balabhadra Behera @ vs State Of Odisha & Another on 15 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.773 of 2022
Balabhadra Behera @ .... Appellant/
Balia Petitioner
Mr.S.K. Bhanjadeo, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Respondent/
Opp.Party
Mr.Manoranjan Mishra
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 15.05.2023
I.A. No. 1468 of 2022
05. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Video Conferencing/Physical Mode).
This is an application for bail.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
sections 457/450/395 of the Indian Penal Code and
sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five
years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (rupees two
thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for three months
for the offence under section 457 of the Indian Penal
Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees
three thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for four
months for the offence under section 450 of the Indian
// 2 //
Penal Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-
(rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for
six months for the offence under section 395 of the
Indian Penal Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-
(rupees one thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for
two months for the offence under section 25 of the
Arms Act and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-
(rupees three thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for
four months for the offence under section 27 of the
Arms Act and all the substantive sentences were
directed to run concurrently by the learned 1st Addl.
Sessions Judge, Khurda vide judgment and order dated
22.08.2022 passed in S.T. Case No. 77 of 2016.
Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner
submitted that the petitioner was taken into judicial
custody on 10.08.2015 and he was directed to be
released on bail on 09.12.2015 and after pronouncement
of the judgment by the learned trial Court on
22.08.2022, he was again taken into judicial custody. It
is further submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged against
unknown persons and after the petitioner was taken into
judicial custody, no step was taken for holding the Test
Identification Parade. It is argued that three witnesses
are relevant so far as the identity of the accused is
concerned, out of which the informant (P.W.15), has
// 3 //
stated that he did not know the accused persons
standing on the dock. Though P.W.7 and P.W.8 stated
that they knew the accused persons standing on the
dock, learned counsel submitted that since no overt-act
is alleged against the appellant and since the name of
the petitioner does not find place in the F.I.R., the
impugned judgment of conviction and sentence relying
on the statements of P.W.7 and P.W.8 cannot be
sustained in the eye of law. It is further argued there are
good chances of success in the appeal and there is no
chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future
and balance of convenience is in his favour and
therefore, the bail application may be favouraly
considered.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of
P.W.7, P.W.8 and P.W.15 and does not dispute that no
Test Identification Parade has been conducted so far as
the petitioner is concerned.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, the nature of
evidence adduced during trial, the fact that the
petitioner was on bail during trial and there is no
material that he has misutilized the liberty while on bail,
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
// 4 //
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 with such terms and conditions
as the learned Court may deem just and proper.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.1469 of 2022
03. This is an application for stay of realization of fine.
Heard.
There shall be stay of realization of fine amount
imposed on the appellant-petitioner by the learned 1st
Addl. Sessions Judge, Khurda vide judgment and order
dated 22.08.2022 passed in S.T. Case No. 77 of 2016
pending disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
(S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
PKSahoo
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PRAMOD KUMAR SAHOO
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 16-May-2023 16:02:00
