Orissa High Court
Sanjit Mallik vs State Of Odisha on 14 November, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.971 of 2023
Sanjit Mallik .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. T.K. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Rajesh Tripathy
Addl. Standing Counsel
Mr. Bijay Kumar Nayak,
Advocate for the informant
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 14.11.2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Mr. BIjay Kumar Nayak, learned counsel files
power on behalf of the informant, which is taken on
record.
The name of Mr. BIjay Kumar Nayak, learned
counsel for the informant be reflected in the cause list
as well as at the top of the brief henceforth.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
defect no.5(d) as pointed out by the Stamp Reporter
has already been removed.
Heard.
// 2 //
Admit.
Call for the trial Court record.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.2196 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 8 of the POCSO Act and sections 354/354-A of
the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for
a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-
(rupees ten hundred), in default, to further undergo
R.I. for a period of three months for the offence under
section 8 of the POCSO Act, R.I. for a period of one year
and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand),
in default, to further undergo R.I. for a period of one
month for the offence under section 354 of the Indian
Penal Code and R.I. for a period of one year for the
offence under section 354-A of the Indian Penal Code
and all the substantive sentences were directed to run
concurrently by the learned Additional Sessions Judge -
cum- Special Judge (POCSO), Jajpur in C.T. Special
(POCSO) No.36 of 2022 (Tr. No.56 of 2022).
Perused the impugned judgment.
// 3 //
Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner
submitted that the petitioner was taken into judicial
custody on 16.07.2022 and he has already undergone
one year and four months of substantive sentence out of
three years imposed by the learned trial Court and there
are good chances of success in the appeal and balance
of convenience is in favour of the petitioner and there is
no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near future
and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may
be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for
the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced
during the trial, the substantive 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,
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.
Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
// 4 //
I.A. No.2086 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.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as
per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
RKM
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: RABINDRA KUMAR MISHRA
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 15-Nov-2023 12:38:20
