Orissa High Court
Situ Panda vs State Of Odisha on 22 April, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.841 of 2024
Situ Panda .... Appellant
Mr. Samarendra Bahadur,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent
Mr. Parth Sarathi Nayak, AGA
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. S. MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 22.04.2025
I.A. No.2004 of 2024
04. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
This is an application for bail under Section 389
Cr.P.C.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to
undergo further R.I. for a period of six months for the
offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and
the substantive sentence was directed to run
concurrently by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh
in Sessions Trial No.69 of 2014.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
the appellant-petitioner Situ Panda is the widow of the
deceased Gati Krushna Purohit and she was on bail
during trial and there is no direct evidence in the case.
The case is based on circumstantial evidence and
whatever circumstances are available on record, those
are against the co-accused Biswaranjan Gupta, who is
an appellant in CRLA No.723 of 2024. He further
submits that on suspicion, the appellant has been
implicated in the crime and she has got good chance of
success in the case and the balance of convenience is in
her favour. Therefore, the bail application may be
favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there are
evidence on record that the appellant was having extra
marital relationship with the co-accused, which is the
motive behind the commission of crime and the call
details report collected by the I.O. during the course of
investigation would show that the appellant-petitioner
had kept contact with the co-accused.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, absence of any direct
evidence, the nature of circumstantial evidence available
against the appellant-petitioner, the fact that she is a
lady and was on bail during trial and there is no
allegation of misuse of liberty by her while on bail and
absence of any chance for early hearing of the appeal in
the near future, we are inclined to release the appellant-
petitioner on bail.
Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail
pending disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with one local
solvent surety 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
( S. S. Mishra)
Judge
05. 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.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as
per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
( S. S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna/Ashok
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 23-Apr-2025 19:47:09
