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 4, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Manoj Barik @ Tukuna @ vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 11 April, 2023

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                     BLAPL No.12087 of 2022

             Manoj Barik @ Tukuna @               ....                   Petitioner
             Monaja Barik
                                                           Mr. S. Das, Advocate
                                           -versus-

             State of Odisha                      ....             Opposite Party
                                                           Mr. A. Pradhan, ASC

                               CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

                                         ORDER

11.04.2023 Order No.

02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The Petitioner is an accused in S.T. Case No.91 of 2018 pending on the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, Ganjam, arising out of Aska P.S. Case No.198 of 2018 for commission of the alleged offence under Sections 302/120-B/34 IPC.

3. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska by order dated 17.11.2022 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel that this Court by order dated 21.06.2022 in BLAPL No.3723 of 2021 had directed the learned Court in seisin to conclude the trial within a period of four months and in the event trial is not concluded within the time stipulated, it shall be open to the Petitioner to renew his prayer.

Page 1 of 2

5. Perused the materials on record.

6. Considering the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this application.

7. Accordingly, BLAPL stands rejected.

8. Since learned counsel for the State, on instruction, submits that the I.O and the Doctor remain to be examined, this Court calls upon the learned Court in seisin to conclude the trial within a period of two months hence.

9. Registry is requested to communicate this order to the learned Court in seisin.

10. Liberty is given to the Petitioner to renew his prayer in the event trial is not concluded within the time stipulated.

11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rule.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge PKS Page 2 of 2