Allowed

Samarpita Rout v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC14 Sept 2015ABLAPL/11878/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment is an anticipatory bail application. The court disposed of the application by allowing it, noting that the offence under Section 307 IPC was not made out and the petitioners are permanent residents of Cuttack, thus having no chance of absconding.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application is allowed. In the event of arrest, petitioners shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as deemed just by the arresting officer.

Samarpita Rout Vs State of Orissa — Anticipatory Bail | Orissa HC (2015)

¶1

ABLAPL No.11878 of 2015
14.09.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Government
 Advocate.

¶2

 The petitioners are apprehending arrest for the alleged commission of offence
under Sections 506, 307, 294, 352 and 384/34 of the IPC in G.R. Case No.947/2015 of the court
of learned SDJM, Cuttack, arising out of Bidanasi P.S. Case No.59/2015.

¶3

 The case has been initiated on a private complaint. This Court is of the opini
on that the offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out. A careful perusal of the complaint
petition reveals that the complainant had alleged that the petitioner no.1 with the help of hi
s father-petitioner no.2 is trying to kill the complainant and threatened that if the complain
ant does not marry the petitioner no.1, a case will be initiated against him.

¶4

 Keeping in view the aforesaid consideration and the fact that the petitioners
are permanent resident of Cuttack Town, which shows that there is no chance of their abscondin
g from justice, anticipatory bail application is allowed. In the event of their arrest in the
aforesaid case, the petitioners shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on such ter
ms and conditions as deemed just and proper by him.

¶5

. The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly.

¶6

 Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

¶7

 S.K. Mishra, J.

¶8

Intheinterim,Misc.CaseitNo.8721isdirectedof2011thatthepetitioner no.2 shall not be disengage
d only on the basis of attaining the age of 60 till the next date.
 Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

¶9

 S.K. Mishra, J.

¶10

Samarpita Rout v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samarpita Rout v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalia Behera Vs State of Orissa

Rama Chandra Sahu Vs State of Orissa

Basudev Mohanty@Gopa Vs State of Orissa

Lala Sarojkanta Chand Vs State of Orissa

Tikina Naik@Tukunath Naik Vs State of Orissa

Balaram Mallick Vs State of Orissa