Petitioners sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with a case under various IPC sections. The Single Judge held that the case was not a fit one for anticipatory bail and dismissed the application.
Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. dismissed; interim order of 19.07.2021 revoked.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL NO.8089 OF 2021
Uttam Das & Others
…. Petitioners Mr.N. Biswal, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha
…. Opposite Party Mr. S. Jena, ASC.
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE D.DASH ORDER
Order No.
22.07.2022
(D. Dash), Judge.
Narayan
Page 1 of 1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners implicated in a case under sections 294, 323, 420, 406, 409, 506, and 34 of the IPC.
Whether the case is a fit case for the grant of anticipatory bail considering the nature of accusations and surrounding circumstances.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Uttam Das & Others
State of Odisha
D. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
