The High Court heard an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed in 2013. The court noted no instruction from counsel and that the case file was not traceable. Concluding there was no apprehension of arrest, the application was rejected and disposed of.
None. The application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
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.6204 of 2013
This anticipatory bail application under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed on 7.3.2013 by the petitioners, namely Prafulla Chandra Pattanaik and Sagar Nayak in connection with EOW, CID, CB, Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.1 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1464 of 2012 pending before the S.D.J.M.(Sadar), Cuttack with regard to present status of the case.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has no instruction.
Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that the file is not traceable.
Since this case U/s.438 Cr.P.C is of the year 2013, I am of the considered opinion that there is no apprehension of arrest. As such, the same stands rejected.
The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly.
………………………….
Dr.A.K.Mishra, J.
pks
2
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted given the lack of instruction and inability to locate the case file.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prafulla Chandra Pattanaik
Sagar Nayak
Dr. A.K. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
