NANDA @ SATYAM BARAN SAHOO v. STATE OF ODISHA
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2024-12-18. NANDA @ SATYAM BARAN SAHOO v. STATE OF ODISHA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 14400 of 2024 1) Nanda @ Satyam Baran ..... Petitioners Sahoo 2) Tapi @ Tushar Kumar Naik Represented By Adv. - Priya Ranjan Singh -versus- State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Smt. Sasmita Nayak, ASC, Mr. S. K. Mishra, Adv. for Informant CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 18. 12. 2024 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Party-State. 3. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 by the Petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Dhenkanal Sadar P. S. Case No. 934 of 2024, corresponding to G. R. Case No. 1711 of 2024, pending in the court of learned S. D. J. M. , Dhenkanal, for alleged commission of offences Page 1 of 3. punishable under Sections 126(2), 296, 115(2), 109(1), 324(4), 304 of the BNS, 2023. 4.
It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioners that due to a misunderstanding a scuffle took place between the petitioners and the Informant, as a result of which the Informant has sustained some simple injuries. He further contended that in the meantime the matter has been amicably settled between both the parties. He further contended that the Petitioner No. 1 does not have any criminal antecedent and the Petitioner No. 2 is having two criminal antecedents. 5. Learned counsel for the Informant on the other hand supported the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioners to the extent that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Informant filed two affidavits by the Informant as well as the Victim. On perusal of the affidavits, it appears that the matter has been amicably dissolved. 6.
Considering the nature of allegation, gravity of offence and the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners. However, it is directed that in the event the Petitioners surrender before the Court in seisin over the matter within a period of four weeks from today and moves an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the matter shall release them on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Violation of any of the terms and Page 2 of 3. conditions shall entail cancellation of bail. 7. Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge S. K. Rout Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 3 of 3. Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 20-Dec-2024 10:11:10
Source: High Court of Orissa. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.