Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 280 (ORI)

Anna Puma Panda v. State Of Odisha

2019-04-04

S.K.SAHOO

body2019
JUDGMENT S.K. Sahoo, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. This is an application for cancellation of bail of the opposite party No.2. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the opposite party No.2 Nanda Kishore Nayak approached this Court in an application under Section 438 of Cr PC. vide ABLAPL No. 15346 of 2018 which was allowed with certain terms and conditions as per order dated 20.12.2018. It is further submitted that C.T. Case No.2163 of 2018 which has been mentioned in the body of the application as well as in the cause title of ABLAPL No.15346 of 2018 is not correct and Khandagiri PS. Case No.538 of 2018 corresponds to C.T. Case No.5195 of 2018 and therefore, the bail order should be cancelled. 4. It appears that this Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner in that application and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State and taking into account the attending circumstances has granted anticipatory bail to the opposite party No.2. Since neither the P.S. case number nor the name of the Court or the offences alleged are in dispute, merely because wrong C.T. case number has been mentioned in the cause title or in the body of the ABLAPL application inadvertently, it is not a ground for cancellation of bail. The petitioner in that case who is the opposite party No.2 in this application can file an application for correction of the C.T. case number. 5. It is further submitted that the condition No.2 of the ABLAPL order has been flouted. The condition is that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any persons acquainted with the facts of the case. It is submitted that the opposite party No.2 is threatening the petitioner but she has not lodged any first information report in that respect. 6. Considering the sub-mission, it is ordered that if the petitioner apprehends any reasonable threat to her life from the opposite party No.2 or the opposite party No.2 tries to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner and the petitioner approaches the concerned police station, the same shall be duly taken care of and necessary security shall be provided to her. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the CRLMA application is disposed of. CRLMA Application disposed of.