Orissa High Court
Rama Krushna @ Ram vs State Of Odisha on 3 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1059 of 2023
Rama Krushna @ Ram .... Appellant/
Krishna Sahoo Petitioner
Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
(Vigilance) Opp.Party
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das
Standing Counsel (Vig.)
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 03.10.2023
CRLA No.1059 of 2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical Mode).
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel
for the Vigilance Department submitted that he has
received the copy of the appeal memo along with the
copies of the impugned judgment and interim application.
He undertakes to file his appearance memo by the end of
this month.
Heard.
Admit
Call for the trial Court records.
List this matter indicating the name of Mr. Sanjay
Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance
// 2 //
Department on the top of the brief as well as in the cause
list henceforth.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.2316 of 2023
02. This is an application for bail.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner
and learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance
Department.
The appellant-petitioner Rama Krushna @ Ram
Krishna Sahoo has been convicted under section 13(2)
read with section 13(1)(d) and under section 7 of the
Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and sentenced to
undergo R.I. for a period of four years and to pay a fine
of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to
undergo R.I. for a further period of three months for the
offence under section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d)
of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and to undergo
R.I. for a period of three years and to pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to
undergo R.I. for a further period of three months for the
offence under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption
Act 1988 and both the sentences were directed to run
concurrently by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance,
Sundargarh in CTR Case No. 29 of 2017.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was on bail during trial and after the impugned
// 3 //
order of conviction and sentence was passed, he is also
on bail and has never misutilized the liberty granted to
him and therefore, the petitioner may be directed to be
released on bail pending disposal of the appeal.
Learned counsel for the Vigilance Department
opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions made by the 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 he was
on bail during trial and absence of any allegation of
misutilization of the liberty and absence of 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
surrendering before the learned trial Court 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
I.A. No. 2318 of 2023
03. This is an application for stay of realization of fine.
Heard.
// 4 //
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 22.09.2023 passed by
the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Sundargarh in CTR
Case No. 29 of 2017 pending disposal of the criminal
appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
Free copy of the order be supplied to the learned
counsel for the Vigilance Department.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
PKSahoo
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PRAMOD KUMAR SAHOO
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Date: 04-Oct-2023 12:14:23
