time of
call, but when the matter was initially called out, a
Passover was sought for. Further, on the last date also
a Passover ... sought for, but when the matter was
again called out after Passover, adjournment was
sought for on the ground of illness of mother
Mohanty, one of the learned counsels for
the Petitioner sought for Passover instead of advancing
argument, but when the matter is called ... second time after Passover of the entire list, Mr.
Mohanty again seeks for Passover.
3. Hence, list this matter on 15.07.2025.
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
Priyajit
None appears for the petitioner at the time of
call despite taking Passover.
3. Against the claim for non-registration
through hybrid mode.
2. Though Mr. Dash, learned counsel prays for a Passover
on behalf of Mr. Baivab, learned counsel for the Petitioner,
considering
through hybrid mode.
2. Though Mr. Dash, learned counsel prays for a Passover
on behalf of Mr. Baivab, learned counsel for the Petitioner,
considering
Opposite Party from the date of filing of the petition.
3. A passover was sought for in the first hour. After lunch
interval when
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for Passover till lunch
for hearing of the bail application. Accordingly, the bail application
shall be taken
Laundering Act, 2002.
3. In view of the aforesaid submission, since a
Passover was sought for on behalf of the petitioner, list
this matter
appears for the petitioner at the time of
call, so also after Passover of the entire list. Further, no
one has appeared for the petitioner
Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks for an
Passover, but it appears from the record that since this
is the second
