The High Court disposed of a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. It declined to grant bail, citing the petitioner's failure to comply with a previous interim bail order and the risk of apprehension.
Bail application dismissed; petitioner not released.
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.2101 of 2020
Mila @ Milan Naik @ Milan Kumar Naik … Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha … Opp. party
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
This is an application under section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with Dhenkanal Sadar P.S. Case No.407 of 2015 corresponding to C.T. (Sessions) Case No.149 of 2016 pending in the file of learned Addl. Special Judge, Dhenkanal for alleged commission of offences under sections 364/302/120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal vide order dated 11.02.2020.
Since the petitioner did not comply with the order of this Court dated 04.07.2017 passed in BLAPL No.4844 of 2010 in which he has been granted interim bail for twenty days and he could be apprehended only in the year 2020, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands rejected.
…………………..…… S.K. Sahoo, J.
P
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail despite non-compliance with a prior interim bail order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mila @ Milan Naik @ Milan Kumar Naik
State of Odisha
S.K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
