The High Court refused to exercise discretion under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to grant bail. It directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months due to its age before dismissing the application.
Bail application dismissed; trial directed to be concluded within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BLAPL NO. 2041 OF 2015
05. 18.11.2015 Heard.
Perused the report submitted by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar.
The case has already been committed to the court of the learned Addl. Sessions
Judge, Champua, in the meantime and the same has been numbered as S.T. Case No.34 of 2015. It
is further found from the report that the case was posted to 14.10.2015 for consideration of
the charge.
Taking into consideration the stage of the proceeding and the materials on rec
ord, I am not inclined to exercise my discretion U/S. 439 Cr. P.C. in favour of the petitioner
.
Learned trial court, i.e., learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Champua is, however,
directed to conclude the trial in the aforesaid S.T. Case within six months from the date of f
rame of the charge, as the matter is quite old.
The bail application is accordingly dismissed.
C.R. Dash, J.
Subha
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted in light of the stage of proceedings and materials on record.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Subha
C.R. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court