Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 11392 Ori
Judgement Date : 18 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
JCRLA No.54 of 2022
Babuli Muduli .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. Manoranjan Padhy,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Rajesh Tripathy
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 18.09.2023
I.A. No.16 of 2023
05. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Learned counsel for the State has produced the written instruction from the Officer in-charge of B.Singhpur police station from which it appears that the victim expressed her unwillingness to marry the appellant-petitioner and her family members are also reluctant to give marry their daughter to the appellant. The written instruction is taken on record.
This is an application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Heard.
// 2 //
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under section 376(2)(i)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default, to further undergo R.I. for a period of six months for the offence under section 376(2)(i)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default, to further undergo R.I. for a period of six months for the offence under section 6 of the POCSO Act and both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC), Jeypore in T.R. Case No.32 of 2018.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 15.03.2018 and he was released on interim bail during trial for a period of fifteen days as per order dated 16.08.2019 and after availing the same, he surrendered on 31.08.2019 and the petitioner has remained in custody for five years and five months and since it is a jail criminal appeal of the year 2022, there is no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near future and balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of the
// 3 //
victim (P.W.2), who was aged about fourteen years at the time of occurrence. He also placed the evidence of the doctor (P.W.12).
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.
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: 22-Sep-2023 12:58:14
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!