Allowed

Rahul Agrawal v. M/S. P.K Minerals Pvt.Ltd., Keonjhar

Orissa HC16 Aug 2024CRLMC/3042/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a non-bailable warrant issued by the S.D.J.M., Keonjhar after he missed one appearance due to his counsel's lapse. The High Court found no illegality but, in the interests of justice, set aside the warrant on payment of Rs.1,000/- cost and an undertaking to appear within ten days.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 19.06.2024 issuing NBW set aside, subject to Rs.1,000/- cost to Advocates' Welfare Fund and appearance before S.D.J.M., Keonjhar within ten days.

Rahul Agrawal Vs M/S. P.K Minerals Pvt.Ltd., Keonjhar — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3042 of 2024

Rahul Agrawal

.....

Petitioner

Represented By Adv. - Sidhant Dwibedi

¶6

-versus-

¶7

1) M/s. P.k Minerals Pvt.ltd., ..... Opposite Parties Keonjhar

¶8

Soumya Ranjan Pahi

¶9

Represented By Adv. -

¶10

1. M

¶11

s Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt.ltd.

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

16.08.2024

Order No.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶18

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶19

The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 19.06.2024 on which date the non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against him by the learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar in 1.C.C. Case No.64 of 2020. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that initially the Petitioner was on bail, after which the Petitioner was appearing before the learned Court in seisin over the matter after he was released on bail. However, on one of the dates fixed for appearance, due to communication gap with his lawyer, the Petitioner was unable to appear since no step was taken to represent the petitioner by the counsel appearing for him. Thereafter, a non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the

¶20

Page 1 of 2 .

¶21

Petitioner. It was further contended that for the laches on the part of the counsel, the party should not be allowed to suffer. Therefore, being aggrieved by such order the Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to quash order dated 19.06.2024.

¶22

On perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that the trial court has not committed any illegality, however, in the larger interests of justice and in order to provide another opportunity to the Petitioner, this Court deems it proper to set aside the order dated 19.06.2024 by the learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar in 1.C.C. Case No.64 of 2020, subject to payment of a cost of Rs.1,000/- by the Petitioner to the Advocates’ Welfare Fund of Local Bar Association within fifteen days and furnishing money receipt thereof in proof of deposit. Further, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar within ten days from today along with a copy of today’s order and shall continue to participate in the proceeding without any further default. In the event, the Petitioner makes any further default in appearance, it is open to the Court in seisin over the matter to take necessary coercive steps against the Petitioner.

¶23

In such view of the matter, the CRLMC is allowed.

¶24

( A.K. Mohapatra)

¶25

Judge

¶26

Anil

¶27

Signature Not Verified Page 2 of 2 . Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 21-Aug-2024 13:31:39

Rahul Agrawal v. M/S. P.K Minerals Pvt.Ltd., Keonjhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Agrawal v. M/S. P.K Minerals Pvt.Ltd., Keonjhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bipin Satapathy Vs State of Odisha

Rudra Narayan Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Rudra Narayan Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Subash Hembram Vs State of Odisha

Sushil Kumar Sahu Vs Prasanta Kumar Pradhan

Sidhanta Kumar Prusty Vs State of Odisha