CUTTACK: Left with a backlog of more than 11,000 criminal appeals, 30 per cent of which are over 10 years old, the Orissa High Court is virtually facing a no-win situation in tackling the problem. In some cases, the court is not even sure when the appeals can be taken up for a final hearing. According to official reports, 11,497 criminal appeals were pending as of August 12, 2022, against 10,065 on the corresponding date last year.
Criminal appeals are filed by a defendant in the High Court after a court convicts and sentences them seeking a review of the lower court’s decision for legal errors that may have affected the outcome of the case. Keeping in view the huge pendency of criminal appeals the court had over a year ago decided to take up on a priority basis old appeals where the petitioners are in jail for more than 10 years. But things seem to have not improved much.
The situation was evident when the criminal appeal of Jayaprakash Pati, who had already spent nine-and-half years in jail came up before the court on August 17. Pati was sentenced to life imprisonment by a trial court in 2018. He was convicted in a murder case registered at a police station in Balangir in 2013.
Taking note of the case records, the division bench of Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice RK Pattanaik said, “This being an appeal of 2018, it is unlikely that in its own turn, it can be finally heard at an early date.”Accordingly, taking other aspects into consideration the bench during the pendency of the appeal released Pati on bail.
In another case Budha Naik had filed a criminal appeal in 2012. He was convicted in a murder case registered at the Phulbani town police station in 2011. The trial court had sentenced him to life imprisonment in 2012. He had already spent more than 10 years in jail.
The criminal appeal came up on August 12. The division bench of Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice SK Sahoo said, “It is unlikely that the appeal in its usual turn will be taken up for hearing in the immediate future. Accordingly, the Court directs that the Appellant shall be enlarged on bail.”