Kumar Saunta vs State Of Odisha on 21 January, 2025

Orissa High Court

Kumar Saunta vs State Of Odisha on 21 January, 2025

Author: S.K. Sahoo

Bench: S.K. Sahoo

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                CRLA No.832 of 2022

              Kumar Saunta                         .... Appellant/
                                                      Petitioner
                                     Mr. B.K. Ragada,
                                     Advocate

                                        -versus-
              State of Odisha                      .... Respondent/
                                                      Opp. Party
                                     Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak,
                                     Addl. Govt. Advocate

                            CORAM:
              THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
            THE HON'BLE MISS. JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
                             ORDER

Order No.                  21.01.2025

                                I.A. No.2064 of 2024

06. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).

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

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.

The petitioner has been convicted for the offences
punishable under sections 376(1)/302/404/ 201/34 of the
Indian Penal Code (hereinafter ‘the I.P.C.’) and sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years to pay fine
of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under section 376(1) of the
Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine

Page 1 of 4
amount, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two
years and to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine
of Rs.20,000/- for the offence under section 302/34 of the
Indian Penal Code and in default, to further undergo
rigorous imprisonment for three years and to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of
Rs.2,000/- for the offence under section 404/34 of the
Indian Penal Code, in default, to further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for six months and to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-
for the offence under section 201/34 of the Indian Penal
Code, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment
for six months and the sentences were directed to run
concurrently by the learned Sessions Judge, Rayagada
vide judgment and order dated 04.08.2022 passed in
Criminal Trial No.54 of 2019.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.11.2016 which
would be evident from the second page of the impugned
judgment. He further submits that three accused persons
faced trial including the petitioner and two of them,
namely, Chakra Dami and Kailash Chandra Badu have
been directed to be released on bail in I.A. No.55 of 2023
arising out of CRLA No.872 of 2022 vide order dated
23.02.2024 and in I.A. No.1227 of 2022 arising out of
CRLA No.642 of 2022 vide order dated 17.08.2022
respectively. The copies of the bail orders have filed and
taken on record.

Page 2 of 4

Learned counsel for the State was also served the
copies of the bail orders of both the co-accused persons
and he was asked to verify whether the petitioner is
similarly situated like the co-accused, namely, Chakra
Dami or not.

Learned counsel for the State submits that apart
from other offences, the petitioner was facing trial under
section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code, whereas the co-
accused Chakra Dami was facing trial under section
376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly, they
were found guilty of such offences. Learned counsel
further submits that in this case, the victim is dead and
the main evidence regarding the overt act committed by
the present petitioner so also the co-accused Chakra Dami
can be borne out from the evidence of P.W.8, who is seen
both the accused in the company of the victim (deceased)
and also the confessional statement made before the
police by the present petitioner, which was deposed by
P.W.8 and P.W.10.

Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, nature of evidence
adduced during trial and the confessional statement of the
petitioner before police is hit under section 25 of the
Evidence Act and learned counsel for the State is unable
to produce any material on record before us to
substantiate as to how there can be difference in the
conviction between the petitioner and the co-accused
persons who have already been released on bail as the
Page 3 of 4
petitioner is in judicial custody for more than eight years
and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in
the near future, we are inclined to release the petitioner
on bail.

Let the petitioner be released on bail pending
disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with one solvent
surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Court with such terms and conditions as the
learned trial Court may deem just and proper with further
condition that the petitioner shall not try to come in
contact with the family members of the deceased and shall
not indulge in any criminal activities in any manner.

Violation of any of the terms and conditions fixed
shall entail cancellation of bail.

The I.A. is disposed of.

( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge

(Savitri Ratho)
Judge

Rajesh

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication Page 4 of 4
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 22-Jan-2025 10:44:20