Muna@Minaketan Barik vs State Of Odisha
2025 Latest Caselaw 8310 Ori

Orissa High Court

Muna@Minaketan Barik vs State Of Odisha on 16 September, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                  CRLA No.1063 of 2025
                 Muna@minaketan Barik             .....  Appellant
                                                               Represented By Adv.
                                                               - Bibhuti Ranjan
                                                               Mohanty

                                            -versus-
                 State Of Odisha                  .....                Respondent
                                                            Represented By Adv. -
                                                            Mr. S.K.Parhi, A.S.C.

                                     CORAM:
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
                                   MOHAPATRA

                                            ORDER

16.09.2025 Order No.

02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2. Heard.

3. Admit.

4. The digitized copy of the LCR be called for.

5. Heard.

6. As an interim measure the realization of fine amount awarded by the Court below shall remain stayed till disposal of the appeal.

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

8. This is an application for grant of bail/suspension of sentence.

9. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as the learned counsel for the Respondent-State.

10. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 29.08.2025 passed in S.T. Case No.73 of 2025/ (S.T. 60 of 2015) C.S. No.73 of 2025 by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Athagarh, thereby convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 506 of I.P.C. and the Appellant-Petitioner has been sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/-. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Petitioner at this juncture contended that the Appellant-Petitioner is in custody for almost 75 days. In view of the aforesaid position, learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner contended that the Petitioner be released on bail.

11. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to release the Appellant-Petitioner on bail on the ground that Appellant-Petitioner was initially charged under Section 363, 366(A), 497, 506 of I.P.C. however he has been convicted under Section 506 I.P.C. only and sentenced to undergo RI for six months.

12. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for both sides, taking into consideration the

maximum period of sentence i.e. six months, this Court is inclined to release the Appellant-Petitioner on bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the Appellant-Petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as would be deemed just in proper by the learned trial court.

13. Accordingly, I.A. stands allowed.

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge

Rubi