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

2010 Supreme(Ori) 213

I.MAHANTY
A. Sanyasi Rao – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent


Advocates:
For Petitioner:Jugala Kishore Panda
For Opp.Party:Addl.Govt. Advocate.

ORDER

8.4.2010 — Heard Mr. J.K. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. V. Narsingh learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, namely, A Sanyasi Rao and K. Narasimha Murty with a prayer to quash the order dated 12.10.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri in C.T. No.1 of 2009, by which order the learned Addl.Sessions Judge came to reject the petitioners appli¬cation for bail under Section 167(2), Cr.P.C inter alia, on the ground that charge sheet had been filed on 8.10.2009 and there¬fore although application under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused-petitioners on 6.10.2009, the same was no more available for consideration due to submission of charge sheet on 8.10.2009 during the pendency of the petitioners appli¬cation for consideration of bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C.

Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Uday Mohanlala Acharya v. State of Maharashtra, reported in AIR 2001 SC 1910 : 2001 (II) OLR (SC) 290, by way of majority judgment rendered by Hon’ble Justice

















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