TUNIA @ JUNIA @ RAMESH MOHANTY @ SURESH MOHANTY @ SURESH CH. MOHANTY v. STATE OF ODISHA
CRLMC/321/2026 · 2026-01-30
S K Panigrahi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 56 (ORI) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 56 (ORI) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.321 of 2026
Tunia @ Junia @ Ramesh Mohanty @ Suresh Mohanty @ Suresh Ch. Mohanty …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Sarbeswar Sahoo, Adv.
-versus- State of Orissa …. Opposite Party(s)
Smt. Sarita Moharana, ASC
CORAM:
HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order No.
ORDER 30.01.2026
01.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. The Petitioner has filed this CRLMC assailing the order of NBW dated 12.05.2006 issued in connection with Nilagiri P.S. Case No.15/2002, against him.
3. Heard.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been on bail since long. He was regularly attending the court on each date of posting of the case. However, on the effective date i.e. on 12.05.2006, the Petitioner could not remain present in court due to noncommunication by the conducting Counsel. Hence, the learned Court in seisin over the matter issued the order of Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Jan-2026 17:49:02 Signature Not Verified
N.B.W. against him. He further submits that the Petitioner undertakes to cooperate till the end of the trial and appear before the learned court below on each date of posting of the case without fail.
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the State, on instruction, submits that the Petitioner is a regular absconder and he does not appear in the Court regularly. She further contends that due to such activities of the Petitioner the trial in the above noted case is running in a senile pace which is not conducive to the criminal justice system. She, accordingly, prays for dismissal of this CRLMC.
6. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and since the Petitioner is a regular absconder and does not appear before the learned Court in seisin over the matter on the effective dates, this Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer made in this CRLMC.
7. This CRLMC is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Ayaskanta Designation: Personal Assistant Signature Not Verified