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

1991 Supreme(Ori) 13

G.B.PATTANAIK
GURUMURTI DIGAL – Appellant
Versus
ASHOK KUMAR DIGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.S.RATH, P.K.MISHRA

G. B. PATTANAIK, J.

( 1 ) THE father of the victim girl has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court u/ S 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancelling the bail of opposite party No. 1 against whom the allegation is that he kidnapped the minor victim girl Gitanjali and committed rape on her. The petitioner lodged the FIR on 6-6-1990 at 12 Noon stating therein that his daughter Gitanjali was not found from the house since 1-6-1990. After expiry of 4 days on getting intimation that Gitanjali was seen in the company of opposite party No. 1 at Jigina Gaon, the petitioner went and rescued his daughter. It was learnt from the daughter that opposite party No. 1 had committed rape on her on several occasions by temptation and by force and, therefore, appropriate criminal action should be taken. Opposite party No. 1 was taken into custody on 9-6-1990. The said opposite party No. 1 having moved an application for bail, the learned Sessions Judge disposed of the application releasing opposite party No. 1 on bail without getting the case diary and without knowing the materials against opposite party No. 1. The petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court for cancellation of bail o



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