AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 247 wordsSashikanta Mishra, J
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
The petitioner is an accused in Lingaraj P.S. Case No. 47 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1241 of 2012 pending in the Court of the learned Special C.J.M. (C.B.I.), Bhubaneswar for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 307/34 of IPC. He was released on bail.
Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the petitioner did not appear on the date fixed, for which by order dated 12.12.2022 learned court below directed issuance of NBW against him, which is impugned in the present application.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of communication gap between the petitioner and the conducting lawyer, he was unable to know about the posting of the case and hence could not appear, but he undertakes to appear before the Court regularly in future.
Having regard to the submissions made and the materials on record, I am inclined to allow the prayer. The impugned order in so far as it relates to issuance of NBW against the petitioner is hereby quashed. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Trial Court within a period of two weeks and move for bail and in such event, he shall be allowed to go on previous bail.
The CRLMC is disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
……………………………