Orissa High Court
Unknown vs State Of Odisha on 21 February, 2025
Author: G. Satapathy
Bench: G. Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Jnyana Ranjan Nayak
(In CRLA No.989 of 2024)
Sanjukta Padhiary
(In CRLA No.1022 of 2024) ... Appellants
Mr. D.P. Dhal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. B.S. Dasparida, Advocate
(in CRLA No.989 of 2024)
Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate
(in CRLA No.1022 of 2024)
-versus-
State of Odisha ... Respondent
Mr. S.K. Rout, Addl. PP
(in both the CRLAs)
Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate(informant)
(in CRLA No.989 of 2024)
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER(ORAL)
Order No. 21.02.2025
04. I.A. No.2461 of 2024 (CRLA No.989 of 2024)
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. This is an application by the appellant-
petitioner-Jnyana Ranjan Nayak for stay realization of
fine.
3. Heard, Mr. Debi Prasad Dhal, learned Senior
Counsel, who by way of appearance memo appears
along with Mr. B.S. Dasparida, learned counsel for
the appellant-petitioner, Mr. S.K. Rout, learned Addl.
Public Prosecutor and Mr. Amitav Tripathy, learned
counsel appearing for the informant-victim in the
matter and perused the record. The appearance
memo be kept on record.
4. Realization of fine under the impugned
judgment in T.R. No.162 of 2023 of the Court of
learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under
POCSO Act, Nayagarh shall remain stayed till disposal
of the appeal.
5. Accordingly, the I.A. stands disposed of.
I.A. No.2462 of 2024 (CRLA No.989 of 2024)
6. This is an application U/S.430(1) & (2) of
BNSS, 2023 by the appellant-petitioner- Jnyana Ranjan
Nayak for grant of bail to him pending further execution
of sentence till disposal of the appeal.
7. Heard, Mr. Debi Prasad Dhal, learned Senior
Counsel appearing along with Mr. B.S. Dasparida,
learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner, Mr. S.K.
Rout, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and Mr. Amitav
Tripathy, learned counsel for the informant-victim in
the matter and perused the record.
7.1. In the course of hearing, Mr. Dhal submits
that although the appellant-petitioner has been
convicted for offence U/S.10 of POCSO Act and is
accordingly, awarded with substantive sentence of
maximum rigorous imprisonment for 7 years, but the
appellant-petitioner has already undergone one and
half years of the sentence and, therefore, the
appellant-petitioner may kindly be granted bail, but
Mr. A. Tripathy, learned counsel for the informant
vehemently opposes such prayer of the appellant-
petitioner and prays to reject the regular bail
application of the appellant-petitioner. On the other
hand, Mr. S.K. Rout, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor
also echoing the submissions of the learned counsel
for the informant prays to reject the bail application
of the appellant-petitioner.
7.2. Amidst the hearing of the bail application, Mr.
D.P. Dhal, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant-
petitioner alternatively suggests to grant interim bail
to the appellant-petitioner for a period of four months
by taking into account his long custody period, to
which the learned counsel for the informant raises no
objection, but he only insists for early hearing of the
appeal because the informant has also preferred an
appeal in CRLA No.1022 of 2024.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances and taking into account the conviction
of the appellant-petitioner for offence U/S.10 of
POCSO Act and the maximum sentence that has been
awarded to him being for RI for 7 years and further
taking into account the fact that the informant-victim
has preferred an appeal challenging the conviction
and sentence of the appellant, so also taking into
account the custody period of the appellant-petitioner
and further the fact that the appellant-petitioner has
also been released on interim bail for a period of
fifteen (15) days during trial, this Court admits the
appellant-petitioner to interim bail for a period of one
hundred twenty (120) days w.e.f the date of his
actual release on bail pending disposal of the
aforesaid I.A. on such terms and condition as deems
fit and proper by the learned convicting Court with
following condition:-
(i) the appellant-petitioner shall not in any
way contact the victim or visit her house or
threaten her family members.
9. The appellant-petitioner is, however, advised
to surrender to custody after expiry of the interim
bail.
10. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as
per Rules.
CRLA Nos.989 & 1022 of 2024 & I.A. No. 2462
of 2024
11. A copy of the appeal memo be served on
learned Senior Counsel for the convict-appellant in
CRLA No.989 of 2024.
12. Indicating the name of Mr. D.P. Dhal, learned
Senior Counsel as counsel for the appellant-petitioner
in I.A. No.989 of 2024, list both the appeals and the
aforesaid I.A. on 19th June, 2025.
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
S. Sasmal
