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 · 282 wordsSavitri Ratho, J
On the last date, Mr.M.Nandy, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the file has been taken away by the client to engage another counsel. Today, when the matter is called, Mr.R.L.Patnaik, learned counsel submits that since the file has been taken away by the client, his name and the name of Mr.M.Nandy, Advocate may not be reflected in the cause list as counsel for the petitioner.
Prayer is accepted.
No other counsel appeared for the petitioner when the matter is called.
This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the F.I.R. and order of N.B.W. of arrest dated 04.08.2021 and 05.08.2020 issued against the petitioner in Mathili P.S. Case No.26 dated 11.02.2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No.29 of 2021 under Sections 20 (B) (ii) (C) and 25 of the NDPS Act pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri.
Vide order dated 04.08.2021, N.B.W. has been issued against the petitioner on the prayer of the I.O. as he reported that the petitioner could not be arrested in spite of his best effort. Vide order dated 9.8.2021 after submission of the charge sheet against the petitioner and one Sonu Sisa, cognizance of offence under Sections 20 (B) (ii) (C) and 25 of the NDPS Act has been taken against them and reminder has been issued for executing N.B.W. against the petitioner, Raghunath Gouda.
Since no counsel has appeared for the petitioner to move the application, I am not inclined to entertain the CRLMC application.
The CRLMC is accordingly dismissed.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
…………………………………