State of Odisha v. The extraordinary delay of 288 days in filing the CRLLP has not
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed. As a result, the CRLLP is dismissed. Chief Justice (Dr. S. Muralidhar) (G. Satapathy) Judge SK Jena/Secy. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANJAY KUMAR JENA Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of…
Judgment
Petitioner Mr. J. Katikia, Addl. Govt. Advocate -versus- Opposite Party Mr. Pravash Ch. Jena, Advocate … CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 03.07.2023 I.A. No.57 of 2015 and CRLLP No.80 of 2015
The extraordinary delay of 288 days in filing the CRLLP has not been properly explained. It does not satisfy the requirement as explained by the Supreme Court of India in Chief Post Master General v. Living Media India Ltd. (2012) 3 SCC 563 and The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bherulal (2020) 10 SCC 654.
Consequently, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed. As a result, the CRLLP is dismissed. Chief Justice (Dr. S. Muralidhar) (G. Satapathy) Judge SK Jena/Secy. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANJAY KUMAR JENA Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Jul-2023 15:09:56
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.