[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Nityananda Mallik vs State Of Odisha on 15 December, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
JCRLA No.01 of 2018
Nityananda Mallik ..... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. Bhabani Sankar Rayaguru,
Amicus Curiae
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Sobhan Panigrahi,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No.
15.12.2025
05. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
This is an application for bail.
Heard.
Perused the impugned judgment.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted for the
offence punishable under section 302 of I.P.C. and sentenced
him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
Rs.1,000 (rupees one thousand), in default, to undergo
Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR BADHEI
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA,
CUTTACK
rigorous imprisonment for further period of one month by the
Date: 16-Dec-2025 17:18:34
learned Sessions Judge, Nayagarh vide judgment and order
dated 11.12.2017 in S.T. case No.162 of 2013.
Learned counsel for the State has produced the custody
certificate of the petitioner, which shows that the petitioner is
in judicial custody for more than thirteen years. He has also
produced the jail conduct certificate, which shows that the
conduct inside the jail is satisfactory. The documents
produced by the learned counsel for the State are taken on
record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is case
based on circumstantial evidence and there are good chances
of success in the appeal and since there is no chance of early
hearing of the appeal in the near future, the bail application
of the petitioner may be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State placed the evidence of the
doctor (P.W.8), who conducted post mortem examination and
opined that the cause of death was due to haemorrhage and
asphyxia and he has noticed number of incised wound on the
deceased, wife of the appellant, and gave his opinion that the
injuries sustained by the deceased have been possible by
tangia/axe (M.O.I), which was produced before him by the
Investigating Officer and at the instance of the petitioner, the
said tangia was recovered.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, absence of any direct
evidence, nature of circumstantial evidence on record and
further taking into account the period of detention of the
petitioner in judicial custody for more than thirteen years and
jail conduct and absence of any chance of early hearing of
the appeal in the near future, we are inclined to release the
petitioner on bail.
Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail in 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 subject
to condition that he shall not indulge in any criminal activities
in any manner.
Violation of any of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
The I.A. is disposed of accordingly.
Let a copy of the order be communicated by the
Registrar (Judicial) to the concerned Jail Superintendent and
to the learned Sessions Judge, Nayagarh by e-mail for
compliance.
A free copy of the order be handed over to the learned
counsel for the State for compliance.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Rajesh
