Orissa High Court
Maheswar Nayak And Others vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 25 August, 2025
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLREV No.543 of 2025
Maheswar Nayak and others .... Petitioners
Mr. J.K. Mishra (2), Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
25.08.2025
I.A. No.814 of 2025
Order No.
01. 1. Heard Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Instant petition is filed seeking delay condonation in
terms of Section 5 of the Limitation Act since the revision is
preferred beyond statutory period.
3. A delay of 72 days is reported as per the SR.
4. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the conducting counsel since expired, the disposal of the
appeal with the judgment as per Annexure-3 was not informed,
hence, the delay and it has been pleaded on record.
5. Considering the same and submission as above,
accepting the explanation offered towards the delay, the Court
is inclined to condone it.
6. Accordingly, it is ordered.
7. IA is allowed condoning the delay of 72 days in filing
of the revision.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
02. 1. Heard.
2. Instant revision is filed against the impugned judgment
at Annexure-3 confirming the order of conviction for the
offences under Sections 341 and 325 read with Section 34 IPC.
3. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that for the other offences, the order of conviction as per
Annexure-2 was set aside. The further submission is that the
eye witness was not examined, however, the alleged incident
has been believed by both the learned courts below leading to
the passing of the order of conviction and sentence and finally,
the impugned judgment at Annexure-3.
4. Considering the facts pleaded on record and submission
as above, notice to the State. Mr. Ray, learned AGA accepts
notice for the opposite party. LCR be called for so as to reach
this Court well before the next date fixed to consider the
contention of Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. List on 24th September, 2025 for hearing and orders.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
I.A. No.812 and 813 of 2025
03. 1. Heard.
2. Instant IAs are filed seeking stay of sentence in terms of
Section 389 Cr.P.C. and release of the petitioner on bail and
stay realization of the fine amount.
3. The maximum sentence is three years and fine of
Rs.5,000/- payable by the petitioner. Since the petitioner was
on bail during trial and pendency of appeal before the learned
court below, this Court, as an interim measure, recording the
submission of Ms. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for him,
directs his release on bail and at the same time stays the
realization of fine from him till the next date fixed with a
direction to the learned CJM-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge,
Bhadrak complying the same in connection with S.T. Case
No.19/35 of 2003.
4. List on the date fixed for further orders.
5. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
TUDU
