Orissa High Court
Laxman Badode vs State Of Orissa on 22 April, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
JCRLA No. 18 of 2023
Laxman Badode .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. Bijay Kumar Mohanty,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Orissa .... Respondent
Mr. Gyanalok Mohanty, SC
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. 28 of 2025
11. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
This is an application for grant of interim bail.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
sections 302/397/201 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 one year for the offence
under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, R.I. for a
period of seven years for the offence under section 397 of
the Indian Penal Code, and R.I. for a period of two years
and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (rupees one thousand), in
default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of three
months for the offence under section 201 of the Indian
Penal Code and all the substantive sentences were directed
to run concurrently by the learned Sessions Judge,
Dhenkanal in C.T.(Sessions) Case No.131 of 2017.
Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is in judicial custody since 08.07.2017 and the
case is based on circumstantial evidence. Though, it is the
case of the prosecution that the appellant was the helper in
the truck in which the deceased was the driver and they
came together in a truck with onion from Ujjain (Indore)
and unloaded the same at Bhubaneswar and the deceased
received the sale price of the onion and transportation
charges and thereafter the appellant asked for some money
to the deceased and since the deceased did not pay the
same, threat was given by the appellant to the deceased,
but there is no evidence on record that the appellant and
the deceased together left Bhubaneswar in the same truck
towards Ujjain and, therefore, in absence of the last seen
of the petitioner in the company of the deceased, the other
evidence available on record are not clinching to sustain
the conviction under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and there are
good chances of success in the appeal and balance of
convenience is in favour of the appellant-petitioner.
Therefore, the bail application may be favourbly
considered.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of
P.Ws.9, 10 and 13.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel
for the respective parties, absence of any direct evidence,
nature of circumstantial evidence appearing on record, the
period of detention of the appellant-petitioner in judicial
custody and absence of any chance of 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)
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA
Designation: Secretary Judge
Reason: Authentication
Swarna/Ashok
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 23-Apr-2025 19:47:09
