[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Govinda Behera vs State Of Odisha (Vigilance) on 26 March, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 295 of 2026
Govinda Behera .... Appellant
Mr. S.S.Pradhan, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha (Vigilance) .... Respondent
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das,
Standing Counsel (Vigilance)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
Order No. 26.03.2026
(Through hybrid Mode)
01. 1. Heard.
2. Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned counsel for the Appellant submits
that there is small typographical error in paragraph 9 of the appeal
memo where in place of Section '409', '326' has been typed. He is
permitted to correct the said error and replace page 5 of the appeal
memo with the corrected page by 31.03.2026.
3. By judgment and order dated 20.02.2026 of the learned
Special Judge (Vigilance), Balasore in T.R. Case No. 04 of 2015,
arising out of V.G.R. No. 41 of 2012, corresponding to Balasore
Vigilance P.S. Case No. 46 of 2012, the Appellant-Petitioner has
been convicted for commission of offences under Section 409 of
the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three years
and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only), in
default, to undergo further R.I. for six months for the offence under
Section 409 of IPC. The period of detention of the convict as UTP,
if any, be set off, as per the provision under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.
By the same judgment, one Suresh Chandra Das has been convicted
for commission of offence under Section 409 of the IPC and under
Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (c) (d) (ii) of the P.C. Act
and he has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and to pay
of fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for six months
more for the offence under Section 13 (1) (c) (d) (ii) of the P.C. Act
punishable under Section 13 (2) of the Act and to undergo R.I. for
three years and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo
further R.I. for six months for the offence under Section 409 of the
IPC. He has filed CRLA No. 251 of 2026.
4. Admit.
5. Call for the scanned copy of the Trial Court Records.
6. List this case on 07.07.2026.
7. This I.A. has been filed for grant of bail during pendency of
the appeal.
8. Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned counsel for the Appellant submits
that there are some typographical errors in this I.A. for which he
wants to withdraw this I.A. and file a properly constituted I.A.
9. Considering the said submission, the interim application is
disposed of as withdrawn permitting the learned counsel for the
Appellant to file a fresh I.A. for bail.
10. This I.A. has been filed for staying realization of the fine
amount.
11. Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned counsel for the Appellant does not
want to press this I.A. submitting that he has already filed a
properly constituted I.A. which is also listed today.
12. The I.A. is disposed of as not pressed.
13. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
14. This I.A. has been filed for staying realization of the fine
amount till final disposal of the appeal.
15. Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned counsel for the Appellant submits
that the Appellant is a farmer and belongs to the Below Poverty
Line (BPL) category and owns less than 1 acre of land. He is aged
about 70 years and getting Rs.1,000/- as Indira Gandhi National
Old Age Pension from the Government. Therefore, it is impossible
for him to deposit the fine amount of Rs.50,000/-. As default
sentence of six months has been imposed, he will be taken into
custody if he is unable to deposit the find amount thereby rendering
the criminal appeal infructuous.
16. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Standing Counsel for
Vigilance opposes the prayer for stay submitting that the Petitioner
along with Head Master, Suresh Chandra Das has withdrawn
Rs.2,70,000/- through withdrawal slips which was meant for
construction of additional class rooms and both have been
convicted for misappropriating the said amount. Hence, no
leniency should be shown to him.
17. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel, the
age of the Appellant, it is directed that if the Appellant deposits an
amount of Rs.5,000/- towards the fine amount within a period of
four weeks from today before the learned trial Court, the realization
of the balance amount of fine shall remain stayed during pendency
of the criminal appeal. Such deposit shall be subject to result of the
Appeal.
18. It is also directed that this amount shall be kept in fixed
deposit in a Nationalized Bank, so that it can earn interest.
19. The I.A. is disposed of.
20. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
puspa
Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA
