Orissa High Court
Arju Yasin @ Aarzoo Yasin vs State Of Odisha on 2 January, 2025
Bench: S.K. Sahoo, Chittaranjan Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.745 of 2011
Arju Yasin @ Aarzoo Yasin .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pattanayak,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak,
Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No.
02.01.2025
I.A. No.341 of 2022
14. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
This is an application under section 389 of the
Cr.P.C. for bail.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been convicted for the offences
punishable under sections 120B/364A/302/201/34 of the
Indian Penal Code (hereinafter 'the I.P.C.') and sentenced
to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
Rs.2,000/-, in default, to suffer further R.I. for a period of
three months of the offence under section 120B/364A/
302/34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for two years with payment of fine of
Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for a period of two
months for the offence under section 201/34 of the I.P.C.
and the sentences were directed to run concurrently by
the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Sundargarh vide
judgment and order dated 27.09.2010 passed in Sessions
Trial Case No.211/71 of 2009.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been in the judicial custody for more
than fifteen years. The case is based on circumstantial
evidence, even the paper book has already been prepared,
and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal.
Moreover, the similarly situated co-accused persons,
namely, Ajit @ Sukru Seth in CRLA No.321 of 2011, so
also, Barun @ Nihar Kanta Mali in CRLA No.574 of 2010
have been directed to be released on bail vide order dated
24.11.2016 and 17.07.2014 respectively and therefore,
the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably
considered.
Learned counsel for the State was asked to produce
the custody certificate of the petitioner and he has
produced the same today, which also indicates that the
petitioner has undergone for more than fifteen years of
substantive sentence in the judicial custody. The custody
certificate is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the State placed the impugned
judgment particularly where the circumstances appearing
against the petitioner as well as the co-accused persons
have been jotted down and discussed.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, nature of evidence
available on record, the period of detention of the
petitioner in judicial custody, and similarly situated co-
accused persons have been released on bail, we are
inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
Let the petitioner be released on bail pending
disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with two solvent
surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Court with such terms and conditions as the
learned trial Court may deem just and proper.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
15. This is an application for stay of realization of
fine.
Heard.
There shall be stay of realization of fine amount
imposed on the appellant-petitioner by the
learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Sundargarh vide
judgment and order dated 27.09.2010 passed in
Sessions Trial Case No.211/71 of 2009 pending
disposal of the criminal appeal.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Issue certified copy as per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
Rajesh
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 03-Jan-2025 16:54:24
