Abul Hasnain Vs State of Odisha

This CRLMC has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the learned Special Designated Court under OPID Act, Cuttack in C.T Case No.12 of 2022 issuing N.B.W(A) against the Petitioners.

¶16

This Court by a common order dated 8.9.2023 in BLAPL Nos.2569 of 2023 and 6124 of 2023 filed at the instance of the Petitioners (Tanweer Nazri and Abul Hasnain respectively) directed release of the Petitioners taking note of the undertaking to deposit the amount involved, which was noted in Paragraph-13 of the order

¶17

Page 1 of 4

¶18

dated 8.9.2023. The said paragraph is extracted hereunder for convenience of ready reference:

¶19

“13. Paragraph-4 of such affidavit which is germane is extracted hereunder;

¶20

“4. That the Petitioner will pay amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakhs) within 30 days from today and after being released on bail the petitioner will pay Rs.20,00,000/(Twenty Lakhs) after completion of 30 days and it is further admitted that the petitioner will pay another cash of Rs.20,00,000/(Twenty Lakh) after completion of 30 days and rest amount of Rs.36,00,000/- will be paid within the period of two months.”

¶21

It is stated at the Bar that the Petitioners deposited an amount of Rs.50 lakhs and were released on bail. Thereafter, the Petitioner in BLAPL No.6124 of 2023 who is Petitioner No.1 in the present CRLMC moved the Apex Court assailing the order passed by this Court dated 8.9.2023 as noted above.

¶22

4-A. By order dated 15.12.2023 while dismissing the Special Leave Petition Hon’ble Supreme Court extended the time for deposit.

¶23

4-B. Such direction, having bearing on the point at issue, is culled out hereunder for convenience of ready reference:

¶24

“xxx xxx xxx

¶25

On the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, only by way of

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

indulgence, we extend the time granted to the petitioner to deposit the sum of Rs.76 lakhs by a period of two months from today. No further extension shall be granted to the petitioner.”

¶28

(Emphasized)

¶29

It is submitted by the learned counsel, Mr. Lenka that because of financial constraints the amount of Rs.76 lakhs could not be deposited within the time fixed by the Apex Court for which N.B.W(A) has been issued by the impugned order dated 13.02.2024 by the learned court below. In this CRLMC further prayer has been made by the Petitioners to deposit the rest amount of Rs.76 lakhs before the learned court below in terms of the order passed by this Court, which is affirmed by the Apex Court as noted.

¶30

Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that there was no willful laches or negligence in depositing the amount in terms of the order passed by the Apex Court but the same was on account of insourmountable financial crunch.

¶31

It is submitted by the learned counsel and it is borne out from the recitals as well of the CRLMC that the Petitioners are now willing to deposit the balance amount of Rs.76 lakhs.

¶32

7-A. On instruction, learned counsel submits that they will seek extension of the period from the Apex Court.

¶33

Page 3 of 4

¶34

Learned counsel for the OPID, Mr. Bhuyan opposes such prayer and submits that the CRLMC is liable to be dismissed in limine since the Petitioners have flouted the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court with impunity.

¶35

Prima facie this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 13.02.2024 issuing N.B.W(A) warranting interference since admittedly, the time limit as fixed by the Apex Court has expired.

¶36

Considering the peculiar factual matrix of the case at hand and taking into account the submissions that the Petitioners intend to seek extension of time from the Apex Court to deposit the rest amount of Rs.76 lakhs, the execution of N.B.W(A) issued by the impugned order be kept in abeyance for a period of eight weeks hence subject to orders to be passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶37

The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.

¶38

(V. Narasingh) Judge

¶39

PKS

¶40

Signature Not Verified

¶41

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRADEEP KUMAR SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cutt ack Date: 07-Aug-2024 18:25:42

¶42

Page 4 of 4

Abul Hasnain v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abul Hasnain v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakas Pasi Vs State of Odisha

Bhagaban Swain Vs State of Odisha

Sangram Swain Vs State of Odisha

Chaggan Bapu Shnde@Chhagan Bapu Shinde Vs State of Odisha

Jaihind Rajput @ Jayhind Rajput Vs State of Odisha

Sujan Kanhar Vs State of Odisha