SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

S. TALAPATRA, SAVITRI RATHO
D. Anita Majhi @ Mila – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. P.K. Jena, Advocate
For the Opp. Parties:Mr. J. Katikia, Addl. Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

S. Talapatra, J.—We have heard Mr. P.K. Jena, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners as well as Mr. J. Katikia, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties.

2. By means of this petition, the Petitioners have urged this court to quash the cases catalogued under Annexure-1, AFR which are pending against the Petitioners either in the investigation stage or where the trial has been held up. A catalogue of those cases where the trial has commenced, but not concluded have been provided by the Petitioners including their status on the day of filing of the writ petition.

3. Mr. Jena, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners in his submission has drawn our attention to similar other cases where the Petitioners have already been acquitted. He has further added that Petitioners are being hunted by the State for their social activities, non-violent and peaceful in nature. But the State has, without any foundation, considered their activities as hostile to the State and deliberately branded their activities as “extremist” which ar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top