High Court allowed bail to petitioners in a poaching case. Despite prosecution opposition, granting bail was deemed appropriate considering co-accused release and case status.
Petitioners enlarged on bail with Rs.25,000 bonds and two solvent sureties each, subject to attendance conditions and fortnightly reporting.
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.12386 of 2022
Gaya Mirdha and others …. Petitioners
Mr. M.K. Mohapatro, Advocate
-versus-
State of Orissa
…. Opp. Party Mr. P.K. Pattnaik, A.G.A.
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
Order No.
ORDER 21.12.2022
// 2 //
It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the Petitioners without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out.
Priyajit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to petitioners accused of setting up a trap to poach wild animals after detection of a connected case.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Gaya Mirdha and others
State of Orissa
G. SATAPATHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
G. SATAPATHY
