Orissa High Court
Dambrudhar Majhi vs State Of Odisha on 22 April, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
JCRLA No.54 of 2017
Dambrudhar Majhi ..... Appellant
Ms. C. Kasturi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Respondent
Miss Subhalaxmi Devi,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order No. ORDER
22.04.2025
03. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
Perused the prisoner' petition at flag 'Z' in which prayer
has been made to engage Ms. C. Kasturi as his advocate in
place of Mr. Ratikanta Mohapatra, earlier engaged counsel.
Ms. C. Kasturi, learned counsel has already filed
Vakalatnama, which is accepted.
The name of Mr. Ratikanta Mohapatra, earlier engaged
counsel shall not be reflected in the cause list henceforth.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
( S. S. Mishra)
Judge
04. This is an application under section 389 of Cr.P.C.
for grant of bail.
Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner submits
that since she has filed a fresh bail application i.e., I.A.
No.97 of 2025, she does not want to press this interim
application.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands disposed of as not
pressed.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
( S. S. Mishra)
Judge
I
05. Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner
supplied the copy of the interim application to the learned
counsel for the State in Court today.
This is an application under section 389 of Cr.P.C.
for grant of bail.
Heard 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 302 of Indian Penal
Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a
fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to
undergo R.I. for a further period of six months by the
learned Addl. Sessions Judges, Dharamgarh vide
judgment and order dated 02.08.2016 passed in C.T.
(Sessions) No. 15 of 2014.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner is in judicial custody since 28.10.2013 and
as such, he has remained in custody for more than eleven
years five months. Learned counsel further submitted that
from the evidence of the eye witnesses i.e., P.Ws.1, 5, 7,
8 and 9, it appears that the petitioner first gave kick and
fist blows to the deceased Rabi Majhi and then assaulted
him by means of bricks and khapara and he belongs to a
tribal area and was working as a labourer and he was
very young at the time of occurrence and even though
paper book has already been prepared, yet there is no
chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future
and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may
be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for
bail and placed the evidence of the eye witnesses so also
the evidence of the doctor (P.W.16), who opined that the
cause of death of the deceased was due to
cerebrovascular injury.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, the period of detention
of the petitioner in judicial custody, the nature of
evidence adduced during trial and absence of any chance
of early hearing of the appeal in near future, we are
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.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with one solvent
surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Court subject to condition that the petitioner
shall not indulge in any criminal activities in any manner.
Violation of any of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
( S. S. Mishra)
Judge
Pravakar
