Orissa High Court
Sudarsan Mohapatra vs State Of Odisha on 9 January, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
JCRLA No.53 of 2023
Sudarsan Mohapatra ..... Appellant
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Saroj Kumar
Routray
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Respondent
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. S.K. Parhi, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
09.01.2025
Order No.
I.A. No.32 of 2024
07. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. This interlocutory application has been filed by the
Petitioner-Appellant seeking his release on bail.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner-Appellant, at the
outset, submitted that the Petitioner has faced trial and he
has been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10
years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo
R.I. for further period of six months for commission of the
offence under Section 372(2)(n) of the I.P.C.; and to under
R.I. for 1 year for commission of the offence under Section
506 of I.P.C. He further contended that the Petitioner-
Appellant is languishing in custody since 10.05.2018.
Therefore, the Petitioner has already undergone
imprisonment for a period of 6 years and 8 months, i.e.
almost 70% of the sentenced imposed. Learned counsel for
the Petitioner-Appellant further submitted that there is no
possibility of the appeal being heard in near future. On such
ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner-Appellant
submitted that the Petitioner-Appellant be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State-Respondent, on the other
hand, opposed the released of the Petitioner on bail on the
ground that the Petitioner was never on bail during trial. He
further contended that allegation made against the Petitioner
is grave in nature and that he has already been convicted.
Therefore, the judgment of conviction is against the
Petitioner-Appellant. He further submitted that since a
prima facie case is made out against the Petitioner-Appellant
on the basis of the judgment of conviction, the Petitioner-
Appellant has no case to be enlarged on bail at this stage.
5. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties and on a careful examination of the
background facts and further keeping in view the fact that
the Petitioner-Appellant has been convicted to undergo
imprisonment for a period of ten years and in the meantime
he has already undergone six year and eight months and
there is no possibility of appeal being heard in near future,
this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner-Appellant on
bail.
6. Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner-Appellant be
released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Chatrapur in S.T. Case No.227 of 2018 on such terms and
conditions as it may deem just and proper. It is made clear
that violation of any of the conditions, which is likely to be
imposed by the trial court, shall entail cancellation of bail.
7. The I.A. is disposed of.
8. Heard.
9. Realization of fine amount under the impugned
judgment in S.T. Case No.227 of 2018 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Chatrapur, shall remain stayed
till disposal of the appeal.
10. The I.A. is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)
Debasis
