Orissa High Court
Prakash Parida vs State Of Odisha on 16 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1133 of 2023
Prakash Parida .... Appellant
Mr. Banamali Sahoo-1,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent
Mr. Arupananda Das,
Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 16.10.2023
CRLA No.1133 of 2023
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical Mode).
Heard.
Admit.
Call for trial Court records.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.2484 of 2023
02. This is an application under section 389(1) Cr.P.C.
for grant of bail.
Perused the impugned judgment.
The appellant-petitioner Prakash Parida has been
convicted for the offences under sections 354/354-A of
// 2 //
the Indian Penal Code and section 8 of the POCSO Act
and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-
(rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a further period of fifteen days for the
offence under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year
and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand),
in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
further period of fifteen days for the offence under
section 354-A of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to
pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-(rupees ten thousand), in
default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further
period of one month for the offence under section 8 of
the POCSO Act and all the substantive sentences were
directed to run concurrently by the learned Adhoc Addl.
Sessions Judge -cum- Fast Track Special Court under
POCSO Act, Puri vide judgment and order dated
22.09.2023 in T.R. Case No.109/03 of 2023/2014.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner was on bail during trial and he has never
misutilized the liberty. Learned counsel further
submitted that the substantive sentence passed by the
learned trial Court is three years 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,
// 3 //
the bail application may be favouraly considered.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
opposed the prayer for bail.
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 never misutilized
the liberty and 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
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.2485 of 2023
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 Adhoc
Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Fast Track Special Court
under POCSO Act, Puri vide judgment and order dated
// 4 //
22.09.2023 in T.R. Case No.109/03 of 2023/2014
pending disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue certified copy as per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
sipun
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 17-Oct-2023 16:29:18
