Anuja Mallik vs State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
2025 Latest Caselaw 10271 Ori

Orissa High Court

Anuja Mallik vs State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party on 20 November, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             CRLA No.223 of 2023
            Anuja Mallik           .....             Petitioner
                                                     Represented By Adv. - Durlabha
                                                     Ranjan Mishra, N.panda,
                                                     S.k.pradhan,dhananjaya Nayak

                                         -versus-
            State Of Odisha                     .....              Opposite Party
                                                            Represented By Adv. -

                                                            Mr. U.C. Jena, ASC

                                  CORAM:
                   MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

                                         ORDER

20.11.2025

Order No.

01. I.A. No.471 of 2023

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned counsel for the Respondent No.1.

3. This I.A. has been filed with a prayer for condonation of delay in the presentation of appeal by 266 days.

4. On perusal of the Stamp Report it appears that the registry indicated that there is a delay of 266 days in the presentation of the appeal memo.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner-Appellant at the outset contended that being aggrieved by the judgment dated 04.04.2022 passed by the Adhoc Addl.-Sessions Judge-cum-First Track Special

Court under POCSO Act in Special G.R. Case No.129 of 2017 the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present appeal. He further contended that by virtue of the impugned judgment the Petitioner has been convicted for commission of an offence under Sections 363/366/376(2)(i)/506 of IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act and he has been sentenced to undergo RI for a maximum period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand).

6. Learned counsel for the Appellant at this juncture contended that the Petitioner is in custody since 22.11.2017. He further clarified that the Petitioner is also continuing in custody even after the impugned judgment was delivered. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, learned counsel for the Appellant contended that the Petitioner, who is a poor man and who was in custody, was unable to arrange funds to engage a counsel in this matter and he was not able to collect the relevant papers for filing of the appeal. In the meantime, the Appellant has arranged money to engage a counsel and has collected the papers. Accordingly, the present appeal has been filed with a delay of 263 days.

7. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to the condonation of delay on the ground that the delay has not been properly explained.

8. Having heard learned counsels appearing for both sides, taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and further keeping in view the fact that the Petitioner is in custody and that he has been convicted with imprisonment for 10 years, this Court is inclined to condone the delay subject to Petitioner paying a cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) to the Advocates' Welfare Fund of the Orissa High Court

Bar Association within fifteen days hence and furnishing money receipt thereof as proof of deposit. Cost be deposited within a week.

9. Accordingly, I.A. stands disposed of.

10. List this matter next week 'For Admission".

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge

Sisir

Designation: Personal Assistant