High CourtsSingle Bench

R. Keshab vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 2 February 2022 · Citation: (2022) 02 OHC CK 0038

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Panigrahi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 389 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376(1), 452, 506
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No.765 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

28 paragraphs · 378 words

 S.K. Panigrahi, J

1.

The matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.

2.

Heard. Admit.

3.

Call for the photocopy of the trial court record.

4.

A copy of the CRLA along with copy of the depositions be served on learned counsel for the State within three working days, who shall take

instructions in the matter and file a short note of submission along with relevant case law on the next date.

5.

List this matter for final hearing on 11.03.2022.

I.A. No.1402 of 2021

1.

Heard.

2.

Stay realization of fine amount as imposed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Chatrapur in S.T. No.114/2012/CIS No.106/2017 till disposal of the

appeal.

3.

The I.A. is disposed of.

I.A. No.1401 of 2021

1.

This is an application under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. for bail.

2.

The appellant-R. Keshab has been convicted under Section 376(1) of the IPC by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Chatrapur vide order dated

30.11.2004 in S.T. Case No.114/2017 (CIS No.106/2017) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-in

default to undergo imprisonment for six months. He has also been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for five years under Section 452 of the IPC and

to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo imprisonment for three months. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years for the

offence under Section 506 of the IPC.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that since the appellant has already spent more than five years in judicial custody out of the total sentence

of seven years, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. Keeping that in view, the I.A. is allowed.

4.

Let the appellant-R. Keshab be released on bail in the aforesaid case by the court in seisin over the matter on some stringent terms and conditions

as deemed just and proper.

5.

The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.

6.

As the restrictions due to resurgence of Covid-19 are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a print out of the order available in the

High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the Advocate concerned with his/her seal, in the manner prescribed vide

Court’s Office Order dated 7th January, 2022.

.............................................