Orissa High Court
Shankar Sahu @ vs State Of Odisha on 23 April, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.619 of 2021
Shankar Sahu @ ..... Appellant/
Shankarshan Petitioner
Mr. Bharat Bhusan Routray,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Miss. Suvalaxmi Devi,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No.
23.04.2025
07. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
This is an application for bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
since another interim application has been filed for bail,
therefore, he does not want to press this interim
application.
Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR BADHEI
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA,
CUTTACK
Date: 24-Apr-2025 13:18:36
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
08. This is an application for bail.
Heard.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted for the
offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal
Code (hereinafter 'I.P.C.') and sentenced to undergo
imprisonment for life under section 302 of the I.P.C. by
the learned Sessions Judge, Angul vide judgment and
order dated 25.08.2021 passed in C.T.(S) case
no.114/2014/118/2014.
Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner
submitted that the petitioner was taken into judicial
custody on 08.03.2014 and he was never released on
bail during trial and during the pendency of this appeal,
he was granted interim bail for a period of ten weeks and
after availing the same, he surrendered at right time and
there are good chances of success in the appeal and
taking into account the period of detention of the
petitioner in judicial custody, the bail application of the
petitioner may be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
opposed the prayer for bail and submittted that three eye
witnesses to the occurrence i.e. P.W.3, P.W.6 and P.W.12
have stated that the petitioner dealt Tabala blow on the
left neck of the deceased Uttam, as a result of which, the
deceased died and the evidence of the eye witnesses get
corroboration from the evidence of the doctor i.e. P.W.8,
who conducted post mortem examination and opined that
the cause of death was due to the combined effect of
massive haemorrhage and neurogenic shock resulting
from cut laceration on the left side of the neck and the
injury is homicidal in nature.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, evidence adduced by
the eye witnesses and the corroborating medical
evidence on record, while not inclining to release the
petitioner on bail on merits, but taking into account the
period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody for
about eleven years and absence of chances of early
hearing, we are inclined to release the petitioner on
interim bail for a period of three months from the date of
release. The petitioner shall immediately surrender
before the learned Court below on expiry of the said
three months period.
For the above period, let the petitioner be released
on interim bail to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Court in connection with the aforesaid case 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 including the
condition that he shall not indulge in any criminal
activities while on interim bail.
Violation of any of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
The I.A. is disposed of accordingly.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
09. List this matter in the week commencing from
28.07.2025.
Learned counsel for the appellant shall produce the
surrender certificate by the next date.
Learned counsel for the State shall obtain
instruction from the I.I.C., Chhendipada police station
regarding the conduct of the appellant while on interim
bail.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Rajesh
