Orissa High Court
Jogendra Mallik vs State Of Odisha on 3 January, 2024
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.566 of 2023
Jogendra Mallik .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. M.K. Sahu, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Rajesh Tripathy
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
03.01.2024
Order No.
I.A. No.1248 of 2023
05. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/ physical mode).
Mr. Tripathy, learned Addl. Standing Counsel
submitted that he has received the letter of the
Inspector in-charge of Pattapur police station, which
indicates that the victim did not have any child and
the criminal antecedent aspect was verified and it
was found that the appellant/petitioner is not
involved in any criminal case at Pattapur police
station other than this case. The written instruction is
taken on record.
This is an application under section 389 of
// 2 //
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Heard Mr. M. K. Sahu, learned counsel for the
appellant/petitioner appearing through Virtual High
Court, Ganjam at Berhampur and Mr. Rajesh
Tripathy, learned counsel for the State.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted
for the offence punishable under section 376(2)(n) of
the I.P.C. 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.20,000/- (rupees twenty
thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for a further
period of four months for the offence under section
376(2)(n) of the I.P.C. and in view of section 42 of
the POCSO Act, no separate sentence has been
awarded for the offence under section 6 of the
POCSO Act by the learned Ad-hoc Addl. Sessions
Judge (F.T.S.C.) under POCSO Act, Berhampur vide
judgment and order dated 24th January 2023 passed
in G.R. Case No.124 of 2019/T.R. No.107/2022.
Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner
submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody
since 30.09.2019 and thus out of ten years of
substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial
Court, he has already undergone four years and
three months of sentence. Placing the evidence of
P.W.5, the victim and the evidence of P.W.9, the
doctor, learned counsel further submitted that the
// 3 //
petitioner has got good chances of success in the
appeal and the balance of convenience is in his
favour and since there is no chance of early hearing
of the appeal in near future, the bail application may
be favourably 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 substantive
sentence imposed on the petitioner, the period
already undergone by the petitioner in judicial
custody, the report furnished by the learned counsel
for the State today 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
local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court on such other
conditions as the learned trial Court may deem just
and proper.
The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.
(S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
// 4 //
06. 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.
Issue certified copy as per rules.
(S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
sipun
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA. CUTTACK
Date: 04-Jan-2024 10:38:19
