Orissa High Court
Anam @ Debashis Jena vs State Of Odisha on 4 January, 2024
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.786 of 2023
Anam @ Debashis Jena .... Appellant
Mr. Biswaranjan Dalai, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent
Mr. Arupananda Das
Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
04.01.2024
Order No.
I.A. No.1673 of 2023
02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/ physical mode).
This is an application under section 389 of
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned counsel for the State.
Perused the impugned judgment.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted
for the offence punishable under section 376 of the
I.P.C. and section 4 of the POCSO Act and sentenced
to undergo R.I. for a period of seven years and to
pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (rupees two thousand), in
default, to undergo R.I. for a further period of one
// 2 //
year for the offence under section 4 of the POCSO
Act and in view of section 42 of the POCSO Act, no
separate punishment has been awarded for the
offence under section 376 of the I.P.C. by the
learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Court
under POCSO Act, Balasore vide judgment and order
dated 26.06.2023 in Special Case No.121 of
2013/T.R. No.01 of 2022.
Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner
submitted that the petitioner was taken into judicial
custody in connection with this case on 12.03.2013
and he was released on bail on 19.06.2013 and for
non-taking of steps during trial, non-bailable warrant
of arrest was issued on 31.10.2019 and the
petitioner was again taken into judicial custody on
29.04.2023. Learned counsel further submitted that
the evidence of the victim as P.W.10 is getting no
corroboration from the evidence of the doctor
(P.W.6), who stated that she did not find any sign
and symptoms of recent sexual intercourse, no mark
of violence on her genital so also did not find any
bodily injury. Learned counsel further submitted that
the 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 the near future, the bail application
may be favourably considered.
// 3 //
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
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, 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.
Violation of any of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.
(S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
03. Heard.
There shall be stay of realization of fine amount
imposed by the learned trial Court on the appellant-
// 4 //
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: 08-Jan-2024 12:33:46
