Orissa High Court
Jayakrushna Pradhan vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 14 July, 2025
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLREV No.325 of 2025
Jayakrushna Pradhan .... Petitioner
Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite party
Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
14.07.2025
Order No.
01. 1. Heard Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State.
2. Instant revision is filed by the petitioner assailing the
impugned order of conviction and sentence awarded to him in
S.T. Case No.149 of 2022 confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.13
of 2025 by a judgment dated 6th May, 2025 of learned Sessions
Judge, Nayagarh on the grounds stated.
3. Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1.
4. Gone through the judgments of learned courts below at
Annexures-2 and 3. Considered the plea of the petitioner and
grounds advanced. In view of the submission of Mr. Tripathy,
learned counsel for the petitioner that an offence under Section
307 IPC is not made out instead one under Section 326 IPC and
in view of the grounds stated in the revision petition, the Court
is inclined to issue notice to the other side for a reply and
response.
5. Accordingly, it is ordered.
6. Notice.
7. Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State accepts notice for
the opposite party.
8. Call for the LCR. List on 4th August, 2025 for final
hearing and orders upon receiving the LCR from the learned
court below.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
02. I.A. Nos. 438 and 439 of 2025
1. Heard Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State.
2. Instant I.As are filed seeking release of the petitioner on
bail with the suspension of the sentence under Section 438
BNSS and stay realization of the fine directed by learned courts
below.
3. It is submitted by Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is aged about 62 years and has
remained in the judicial custody ever since arrested and has by
now suffered half of the sentence awarded to him and therefore,
he should be allowed to go on bail with any conditions and
further staying the realization of the final amount as is directed.
4. Objection of Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State is
noted down. It is submitted that the evidence is clear and
conspicuous regarding the involvement of the petitioner, who
allegedly assaulted be injured by means of a dangerous weapon
and hence, he should not be allowed to go on bail as has been
pleaded for. Having regard to the fact that the alleged incident
is of the year 2022 and since August, 2022, the petitioner is in
judicial custody and suffered half of the sentence directed for
an offence under Section 307 IPC, recording the submission of
Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner that he has no
other antecedent and also the objection of the State, the Court is
of the view that he should be allowed to go on bail with
stringent conditions and also staying the realization of the final
amount for the time being.
5. Accordingly, it is ordered.
6. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released
on bail in connection with S.T. Case No.149 of 2022 subject to
the orders of learned Assistant Sessions Judge (Women's
Court), Nayagarh. Furthermore, the final amount awarded
against the petitioner and its realization shall remain stayed
until further orders.
7. List on the next date for further orders.
8. Urgent copy of this order be issued as per rules.
Designation: Junior Stenographer
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Location: OHC, CTC
Date: 15-Jul-2025 18:57:26
Judge
Rojina
