Allowed

Sudhir Kumar Choudhury v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC20 Apr 2016BLAPL/1918/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge permitted bail to a petitioner accused of offences under IPC and Arms Act, directing furnishing of bond with sureties and specific conditions regarding appearance and not leaving the state. Bail application disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties each, subject to conditions of appearance and not leaving the state without permission.

Sudhir Kumar Choudhury Vs State of Orissa — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2016)

¶1

BLAPL No.1918 of 2016

¶2

20.04.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶3

 The petitioner is in custody as an accused in G.R. Case No.353 2016 on the file of learn
ed S.D.J.M.(S), Cuttack registered under Sections 341/342/323/294/506/34, I.P.C. read with Sec
tions 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

¶4

 It has been alleged that the petitioner while working as a Liasoning Officer of one Tant
ia Construction, he helped some anti-socials to enter into the premises of Water Project at Ha
diapatha, Cuttack and they forcibly stopped the work by threatening. The alleged occurrence to
ok place in the year 2013 and the present F.I.R. was lodged and the present petitioner was arr
ested in the year 2016.

¶5

 Learned counsel on behalf of the State submits that the investigation is continuing and
further materials are yet to be ascertained and that the petitioner is involved in two other c
ases. The said two cases are seen to have been registered around the same time of the present
case.

¶6

 However, considering the alleged nature of offences and the circumstances, it is directe
d that let the petitioner be released on bail by furnishing bond of Rs.20,000/-(rupees twenty
thousand) with two sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.
M.(S), Cuttack in the aforesaid case with the conditions that he shall appear before the Inves
tigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of investigation, shall not tamper with
the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever and shall not leave the State of Odisha with
out prior permission of the learned S.D.J.M. (S), Cuttack.

¶7

 The Bail Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶8

 Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶9

 J.P. Das, J.

¶10

Sudhir Kumar Choudhury v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Kumar Choudhury 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Guru Prasad Murmu@Rakesh Vs State of Orissa

Baliya Tudu Vs State of Orissa

Prasanta Dandasena Vs State of Orissa

Narendra Biswal Vs State of Orissa

Motiram Majhi Vs State of Orissa

Khirod Pradhan Vs State of Orissa