GAJANAND AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA
LAWS(SC)-2006-9-29
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ORISSA)
Decided on September 18,2006

GAJANAND AGARWAL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

KUMARI SUMAN PANDEY VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(SC)-2007-2-47] [REFERRED TO]
GAJANAND AGARWAL VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(SC)-2007-4-81] [REFERRED TO]
PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2010-6-11] [REFERRED TO]
PHULCHAND TIRKEY VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(JHAR)-2010-9-88] [REFERRED TO]
PRADEEP N SHARMA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2010-3-192] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MEGHALAYA VS. NURUL ISLAM [LAWS(MEGH)-2015-9-8] [REFERRED TO]
SUMAN PANDEY VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2007-2-179] [REFERRED TO]
SUBODH KUMAR YADAV VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(SC)-2009-7-181] [REFERRED TO]
AMBARISH RANGSHAHI PATNIGERE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2010-7-205] [REFERRED TO]
PREMCHAND BANSI JADHAV VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2012-8-19] [REFERRED TO]
KANIKA NARANG NEE PASRICHA VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2011-2-404] [REFERRED TO]
GOVIND NARAIN JOHARI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2013-5-231] [REFERRED TO]
ABHISHEK SINGH @ SONU VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2013-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
ATIBAL SINGH YADAV VS. STATE OF MP [LAWS(MPH)-2015-3-8] [REFERRED TO]
BRAHMA SINGH SAINANI VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2015-3-42] [REFERRED TO]
ANWAR BEG VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2015-3-44] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. VIJAYAWADA AYURVED BHANDAR VS. S.K. PARTHASARATHI, REP. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR VIJAYAWADA, AND ANOTHER [LAWS(APH)-2017-8-14] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. (MAJOR B.C.) VS. GAYATRI PRASAD PRAJAPATI AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-177] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. SMT. SABITRI RAI [LAWS(SIK)-2017-12-2] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. VIJAYAWADA AYURVED BHANDAR VS. S.K. PARTHASARATHI [LAWS(APH)-2016-8-91] [REFERRED TO]
C HINDUMATHI VS. STATE OF A P REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND 10 OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-2018-9-6] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. P KALPANA VS. THE STATE OF TELANGANA REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF AP HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-2018-6-67] [REFERRED TO]
B.K. ASHWINI AGNI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2019-1-404] [REFERRED TO]
ANIRUDDHA BHATTACHARJEE VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2020-10-138] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2021-4-6] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)Challenge in these appeals is to the order of the learned Single Judge of the Orissa High Court granting bail to the respondent No.2 in each case. In criminal Appeal relating to SLP (Criminal) 3745 of 2006 respondent No.2 is Bimal Kumar Khetan whereas in the criminal appeal relating to SLP (Criminal) 3746 of 2006, the respondent No.2 is Sunil Kumar Khetan. The primary stand of the appellant is that the bail was granted without application of mind, as no reason was indicated as to why respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as the accused) was entitled to bail. It is pointed out that earlier several petitions were rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge and the High Court.
(3.)It is unnecessary to elaborately state the factual position as stated by the appellant.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.