This single-judge order addresses a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by a petitioner awaiting trial for murder. The High Court rejected the application deeming the investigation incomplete as key witnesses had not yet been examined.
Liberty granted to renew the bail application before the Sessions Court after key witnesses are examined.
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. 4523 of 2023
Dilip Kumar Munda
Petitioner
Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha
Opposite Party
Mr. H.K. Panigrahi, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER 05.03.2024 Order No. 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Page 1 of 2
the same was during the currency of inevestigation, taking into account the nature of accusation and leave was granted to the Petitioner to move afresh after filing of charge sheet.
(V. NARASINGH) Judge
Santoshi
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 06-Mar-2024 19:25:25
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by an accused in a murder case should be entertained during the pendency of the investigation and before the examination of key witnesses.
Whether the discovery of the weapon of the offence and the presence of un-examined witnesses make the continuation of custody warranted without granting bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dilip Kumar Munda
State of Odisha
V. NARASINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
