Orissa High Court
Raju Miniaka vs State Of Odisha on 26 March, 2025
Bench: S.K. Sahoo, M.S. Raman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
JCRLA No.115 of 2022
Raju Miniaka ..... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr.Debasish Panda, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Sarat Kumar Pradhan,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN
ORDER
26.03.2025
Order No.
I.A. No.152 of 2024
10. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video
conferencing/physical mode).
This is an application under section 430 of B.N.S.S.. for
grant of bail.
Heard.
Perused the impugned judgment.
The appellant-petitioner has been convicted for the offence
punishable under section 302 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for life imprisonment for life and to pay a
fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), in default to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for further period of one year and
the period undergone by the petitioner be set off and the fine
amount, if realized, be paid to the parents of the deceased as
compensation for commission of the offence under section 302 of
the IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Rayagada vide judgment
and order dated 25.08.2022 passed in Criminal Trial No.29 of
2019.
As per the order dated 28.02.2025, learned counsel for the
State has produced the custody certificate from the Senior
Superintendent of Circle Jail, Koraput, which shows that the
petitioner has remained in custody for 6 years and 9 days. The
custody certificate is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though all
the four witnesses, i.e., P.Ws.1, 4, 5 & 14 have stated that the
petitioner assaulted the deceased by means of a tangia, but the
doctor, who conducted post mortem examination over the dead
body of the deceased, has noticed a lacerated wound on the right
side back of the neck of the deceased and though he has opined
that said tangia can cause such injury, but prima facie it appears
that no sharp side of the said weapon has been used. Learned
counsel further submits that since the petitioner is having no
criminal antecedents as per the instruction of the learned counsel
for the State and the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the
near future for hearing, the bail application of the petitioner may
be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State, placing the evidence of the
four eye witnesses and the doctor, opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel
for the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced, the
post mortem examination report, the period of detention of the
petitioner in judicial custody, the absence of any criminal
antecedents against the petitioner 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 pending
disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-
(rupees twenty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with such
terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and
proper with further condition that he shall not indulge himself in
any criminal activity while on bail.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(M.S.Raman)
Judge
Basu
Designation: ASST. REGISTRAR-CUM-SR. SECRETARY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK
Date: 29-Mar-2025 06:12:29
