The Single Judge rejected the petitioner's application for bail in a POCSO case involving alleged offences under Section 377 IPC. The court found the nature of accusations and victim testimony supported the prosecution, leading to bail rejection.
Bail prayer rejected; BLAP dismissed.
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
BLAPL No. 10263 of 2021
Ajay Shankar Dubey
….
Petitioner
Ms. Kranti Prabha Mukhi ,
Advocate
-Versus -
State of Odisha
Opposite Party
….
Mr.A. Pradhan, Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
ORDER_
04.02.2022
Order No.
4.
Page 1 of 1
are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020, modified by Notice No.4798, dated 15th April, 2021, and Court’s Office Order circulated vide Memo Nos. 514 and 515 dated 7th January, 2022.
( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge
B.C. Tudu
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail pending trial in connection with offences under Section 377 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.
Whether the nature of accusations and victim testimony justify rejection of bail in a POCSO case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ajay Shankar Dubey
State of Odisha
Sashikanta Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
