[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Butu Jena vs State Of Odisha on 29 January, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.251 of 2025
Butu Jena .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. Bikram Chandra Ghadei,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak
Addl. Government Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 29.01.2026
(Hybrid mode)
10. 1. This is an application for bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the convict-appellant
and learned counsel for the State-Respondent.
3. The appellant has been convicted for the
offences punishable under sections 449/ 394/ 302/
120-B/34 and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for life
for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees
twenty thousand) each, in default, to undergo further
period of R.I. for two years and R.I. for ten years for
the offence under Section 394/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten
thousand) each, in default, to undergo further period
of R.I. for two years and R.I. for ten years for the
offence under Section 449/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten
thousand) each, in default, to undergo further R.I. for
two years and R.I. for ten years for the offence under
Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and to pay a
fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each, in
default, to undergo further R.I. for two years. All the
substantive sentences were directed to run
concurrently by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions
Judge, Bhubaneswar in Crl. Trial No.19/42 of 2013.
4. Vide order dated 09.07.2025, this Court admitted
the appellant to interim bail for a period of three
months from the date of his release. While granting
interim bail to the convict-appellant, the Coordinate
Bench had recorded as under:
"Perused the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner
submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody for
more than nine years and the case is based on
circumstantial evidence and the petitioner has got
no criminal antecedents. The circumstance cited by
the prosecution against the petitioner is that at his
instance, some ornaments were recovered which
were latter placed in the Test Identification Parade
and identified by P.W.2 to be that of the deceased
and recovery of one yellow colour banian shirt which
was stained with blood and on chemical
examination, the blood group matched with that of
the deceased.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a permanent resident of district
Jagatsinghpur and he was running his shop in a
cabin and sustaining his livelihood and there is no
chance of early hearing in the near future.
Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may
be favorably considered.
Learned counsel for the State has not disputed
about the period of detention of the petitioner in
judicial custody for more than nine years and also
that the petitioner is having no criminal
antecedents.
Considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the respective parties and in
view of the materials available on record, since it is
a case of double murder, to assess the conduct of
the petitioner, we are inclined to release the
petitioner on interim bail for a period of three
months from the date of his release and the
petitioner shall surrender before the learned trial
Court immediately on expiry of the three months
period.
For the above period, let the appellant-
petitioner be released on interim bail in the
aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.20,000/-(rupees twenty thousand) with one local
solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction
of the learned trial Court subject to condition that
he shall not indulge in any criminal activities in any
manner.
Violation of any of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of interim bail."
5. The appellant availed the interim bail granted to
him for three months and subsequently surrendered
before the learned trial Court and filed the Surrender
Certificate.
6. Pursuant to the order dated 28.11.2025, the
learned State counsel has produced a report dated
21.10.2025 issued by the IIC, Saheed Nagar PS,
Bhubaneswar U.P.D. regarding the conduct of the
convict-appellant during the interim bail period, which
reads as under:
"With reference to the letter and subject cited
above, I have the honour to submit that, on perusal
of available PS records, no adverse activity found
against the petitioner during his interim bail period,
which leads to misutilisation of liberty as per
instructions of bail condition."
The said report is taken on record.
7. Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for the State has
opposed the bail plea raised by the learned counsel for
the appellant.
8. Regard being had to the submissions made by
learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature
of the offence, taking into account the period of
detention of the convict-appellant in the judicial
custody for about ten years and absence of any
chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near
future, we are inclined to admit the convict-appellant
on bail.
Let the convict-appellant be released on bail
pending disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with one
local solvent surety for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court subject to
condition that he shall not be indulged in any criminal
activities in any manner.
9. Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall
entail cancellation of the bail.
10. Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.
11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as
per rules.
(Manash Ranjan Pathak)
Judge
(Sibo Sankar Mishra)
Judge
Subhasis
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 30-Jan-2026 16:37:52
