Dismissed

Debananda Das Mohapa v. State

Orissa HC14 Sept 2016CRLMC/1608/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Misc. application under section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court declined to quash a cognizance order citing laches and insufficient grounds. It refused to express an opinion on the limitation plea but permitted the aged petitioner to surrender for bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is at liberty to surrender before the S.D.J.M., Puri, for bail to be disposed of in accordance with law.

Debananda Das Mohapa Vs State — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2016)

¶1

CRLMC No. 1608 of 2010

¶2

14.09.2016

¶3

 This is an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner Debananda Das
 Mohapatra@ Deb@ Debendranath Das Mohapatra challenging the impugned order dated 13.3.2000 pas
sed by the S.D.J.M., Puri in G.R. Case No. 1584 of 1995 in taking cognizance of the offences u
nder sections 147/ 148/149/286/332/336/337 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of Criminal
Law Amendment Act. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the order of cogn
izance is barred by limitation in view of the provision under section 468 Cr.P.C. but in view
of the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in case of Japani Sahoo-Vrs- Chandrasekhar Mohanty
 reported in (2007) 38 OCR(SC)-309, he did not want to press that point. Since no other point
was raised challenging the impugned order of cognizance so also taking into account the inordi
nate delay in challenging the impugned order of cognizance, I am not inclined to interfere wit
h the same. Accordingly, the criminal Misc. Case stands dismissed.

¶4

 At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that co-accused pers
ons have already been released on bail and the petitioner is an aged person and he stands on t
he similar footing like the co-accused persons and therefore, in the event the petitioner surr
enders before the learned S.D.J.M., Puri, the learned Magistrate may be directed to favourably

¶5

consider the bail application. Without expressing any opinion on the contention advanced by th
e learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner is at liberty to su
rrender before the learned S.D.J.M., Puri, in the event of which learned Magistrate shall proc
eed in accordance with law to dispose of the bail application, considering the claim of parity
 as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶6

S.K.Sahoo, J.

¶7

¶8

Debananda Das Mohapa v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Debananda Das Mohapa v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Ram Vs State of Orissa

Sk Habib Vs State of Odisha

Laxmidhar Vs State

Dinabandhu Behera Vs State of Orissa

Nrusingha Charan Padhi Vs State of Orissa

Sidhartha Panda Vs Payaswini Rath@Panda