Petitioners challenged a death occurrence by invoking ABLAPL. The learned Single Judge perused materials indicating prima facie complicity and severity of injuries. Dismissing this on merits, the Judge rejected the petition and refused to entertain the writ.
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.7879 of 2023
Krishna Das and another
…. Petitioners
Md. G. Madani, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Addl. Standing Counsel CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
ORDER
Order No.
16.11.2023.
Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 16-Nov-2023 16:44:26
Page 1 of 1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the ABLAPL under Article 226 needs to be entertained given prima facie complicity and severity of injuries.
Whether the refusal to entertain the ABLAPL in a death occurrence case is justified.
Krishna Das and another
State of Odisha
Sashikanta Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
