In a writ petition, the court noted the petitioner's counsel's submission that the abducted person had returned home. The court declined to appreciate an affidavit submitted by the opposite party and closed and disposed of the proceeding without further orders.
Proceeding closed and disposed of.
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
WPCRL No.61 of 2022
Sanjaya Samal @ Sanju
..……. Petitioner
Mr. Afraaz Suhail, Advocate -Versus-
State of Odisha & others
.……... Opp. Parties
Mrs. Saswata Patnaik, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA JUSTICE M. S. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
27.06.2022
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. Mr. Afraaz Suhail learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the abducted person has returned home and he is now staying with his parents. The said fact gets support from the affidavit filed by Opp. Party No.6.
3. In view of the above statement made by the counsel for the petitioner, we are not inclined to appreciate that affidavit.
4. Mrs. Saswata Patnaik, learned Addl. Government Advocate has supported the statement made by the petitioner’s counsel. Consequently, this proceeding stands closed and disposed of.
(S. Talapatra) Judge
(M.S. Sahoo) Judge
Subbhasis
2
3
Sanjaya Samal @ Sanju
State of Odisha
S. TALAPATRA
M. S. SAHOO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
