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

2025 Supreme(Ori) 316

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K.PATTANAIK
Jamir Miya – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Basudev Pujari
For the Respondent: Pradeep Kumar Sahoo

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding default bail. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. court's analysis of case law. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. clarification on statutory bail entitlements. (Para 12)
5. conclusion and order. (Para 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT :

1. Instant revision filed under Section 438 read with Section 442 BNSS is at the behest of the petitioners challenging the impugned order dated 6th November, 2025 passed in connection with Special G.R. Case No.185 of 2024 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkanagiri arising out of Mathili P.S. Case No.257 of 2025, whereby, an application under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 187(2) BNSS demanding default bail by them was rejected on the grounds inter alia that such decision is not in accordance with law and hence, liable to be interfered with and set act naught.

3. In connection with the alleged incident and the case registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, the petitioners were arrested and produced before the learned court below and the application moved by them thereafter for bail was rejected. It is pleaded on record that the petitioners moved BLAPL Nos.

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