Sushil Kumar Nayak vs. State Of Odisha
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
After Week/Month/Vacation
Before:
Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice, Hon'ble Surya Kant, Hon'ble Aniruddha Bose
Stage:
AFTER NOTICE (FOR ADMISSION) - CRIMINAL CASES
Remarks:
Disposed off [Bail granted ]
Listed On:
22 Mar 2021
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Interlocutory Applications:
137042/2020,
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
SLP(Crl.)No.5027/20
<pre>Court 2 (Video Conferencing)</pre> SECTION II-B ITEM NO.20SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5027/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-12-2019 in BLAPL No.9624/2017 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack)
SUSHIL KUMAR NAYAK
VERSUS
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF ODISHA
Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. IA No. 137042/2020 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION)
Date: 22-03-2021 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
For Petitioner(s) Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., Adv. Mr. Somanatha Padhan, AOR Mr. Aabhas Parimal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following $0$ R D E R
The Court is convened through Video Conferencing.
Heard learned counsel appearing $\mathsf{on}$ behalf of the petitioner as also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.
Although learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent - State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner herein yet taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than five records, and there is no need to keep him in jail, we think it is a fact case to grant bail to the petitioner.
The petitioner is, accordingly, directed to be enlarged on bail on terms and conditions to be imposed by the trial court.
However, we direct the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
In case the petitioner or the co-accused, who have been granted bail earlier, do not co-operate with the trial or try to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel their bail and proceed with the case.
The respondent – State is also at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail before the trial court, if the petitioner or the co-accused do not co-operate with the trial or try to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses or do not attend the court when they called for.
The special leave petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
As a sequel to the above, pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.
(SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (RAJ RANI NEGI) DEPUTY REGISTRAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR