Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Sujata Pati vs The State Of Odisha on 25 September, 2023

Bench: Hrishikesh Roy, Sanjay Karol

                                                         1


     ITEM NO.5                                COURT NO.9                    SECTION II-B

                                    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F          I N D I A
                                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s).28513/2023

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-07-2023
     in IA No. 1010/2023 passed by the High Court Of Orissa At Cuttack)

     SUJATA PATI                                                               Petitioner(s)

                                                        VERSUS

     THE STATE OF ODISHA                                                       Respondent(s)

     (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.192797/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY
     IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS )

     Date : 25-09-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL


     For Petitioner(s)                  Mr. Harsh Kaushik, AOR
                                        Ms. Adrija Mishra, Adv.


     For Respondent(s)                  Abhijit Patnaik, Adv.
                                          (Caveator)


                              UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                 O R D E R

Delay condoned.

2. Heard Mr. Harsh Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Abhijit Patnaik, the learned counsel who made submission on behalf of the informant of the FIR No.255 of 2022.

Signature Not Verified

3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that in the premises in Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2023.09.26 18:19:46 IST Reason: question a school is operating providing education upto 8 th standard and the petitioner has already taken steps to vacate the present 2 premises and re-locate to another building, which is currently under construction. It is then submitted that initially also the petitioner taking note of the timeline for construction, had made a request for extending the time to vacate the premises until January 2024. But since limited time was granted, the time schedule could not be adhered by the petitioner. It is however the say of the petitioner that she herself is interested to vacate and more out the school from the present location.

4. The learned counsel for the caveator in turn submits that petitioner failed to adhered to the timeline and for this reason her bail has been cancelled and she is currently in custody.

5. Considering the circumstances, only on the limited prayer of granting some time for handing over peaceful vacant possession of the premises, issue notice.

6. The petitioner is permitted to serve Dasti notice additionally, to the Standing Counsel for the State of Odisha.

7. The petitioner would file appropriate affidavit within 10 days, to confirm the time line for vacating the premises.

8. List on 16th October 2023.

(DEEPAK JOSHI)                                            (KAMLESH RAWAT)
COURT MASTER (SH)                                      ASSISTANT REGISTRAR