✦ Orissa High Court

Gadadhar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 2636 of 2022S K SAHOO

Case at a glance

Bench
S K SAHOO

Key paragraphs

  • Para 0101. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This is an application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with…

Judgment

Mr.Ranjan Kumar Rout, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party Mr.A. Das, Addl. Government Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO Order No. ORDER 05.04.2022

01.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This is an application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Balipatna P.S. Case No. 44 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 194 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Bhubaneswar for the commission of the alleged offences punishable under sections 451, 427 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 134, 135(A) of Representation of People Act, 1950, 1951, 1989 read with section 29(d)(r) of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, 1964. Perused the first information report annexed to the anticipatory bail application. // 2 // Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is background of civil dispute between the parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioner and that the offences are triable by Magistrate and on hearing the learned counsel for the State, I am inclined to release the petitioner on anticipatory bail and accordingly, this Court directs that in the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(rupees thousand) with two sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer with further conditions that he shall make himself available for interrogation by the I.O. as and when required and he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing any facts to the Courts or to the Investigating Officer. The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules. Judge ( S.K. Sahoo) P

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Orissa High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 2636 of 2022). ← Search more judgments