NDLI: Kusha Duruka Vs. The State of Odisha

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Personal gain Contempt of court Fabricated document Falsehood Justice delivery system Misrepresentation Administration of justice Suppression of material facts
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the prerequisites to be mandatorily mentioned in the application filed for grant of bail; and effect of non-mentioning of details of previous bail applications and order in all bail applications.Bail – Bail applications – Prerequisites to be mandatorily mentioned in the application filed for grant of bail: Held: Details and copies of orders passed in the earlier bail applications filed by the petitioner which have been already decided – Details of any bail application filed by the petitioner, pending in any court, higher or lower court, and if none is pending, a clear statement to that effect – All bail applications filed by the different accused in the same FIR to be listed before the same Judge – Registry of the court to also annex a report generated from the system about decided or pending bail applications in the case in question – Investigating Officer assisting the State Counsel in court duty bound to apprise him of the orders, if any, passed by the court with reference to different bail applications or other proceedings in the same crime case – Counsel appearing for the parties to conduct themselves truly like officers of the Court – These suggestions are to streamline the proceedings and avoid anomalies with reference to the bail applications. [Paras 20, 21]. Bail – Grant of bail pending trial – Non-mentioning of details of previous bail applications and order in bail applications – On facts, allegations under the NDPS Act against the appellant and co-accused – Rejection of bail applications by the Sessions Court – However, the High Court allowed the co-accused’s bail application whereas appellant’s bail application was dismissed – Both the orders pronounced by different judges of the High Court– There against, the appellant filed SLP and notice was issued – Meanwhile, the second bail application filed by the appellant was allowed by the judge of the High Court who had granted the bail to the co-accussed, however in the said order, there was no mention of the fact that it was the second bail application filed by the appellant nor regarding the pendency of the SLP before this Court, in which notice had already been issued - Propriety:Held: In the list of dates and events as also in the body of the bail application, the appellant did not mention regarding disposal of his earlier bail application by the High Court and also filing of the SLP in this Court – During the pendency of the matter before this Court a fresh bail application was filed not only before the trial court but even before the High Court – High Court even granted bail to the appellant – In the bail application filed before the High Court, it was not mentioned that the same was second bail application filed by the appellant – This Court cannot comment on the contents of the bail application filed before the Sessions Judge as the copy thereof is not available on record here – Though considering the conduct of the appellant, one of the option available was to cancel his bail, however, such an extreme step is not taken – Appeal is dismissed as infructuous and the cost of ₹10,000/-, imposed on the appellant. [Paras 18, 22, 23]. Administration of justice – Justice delivery system – Suppression of material facts – Effect: Held: Litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice with falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final – Suppression of material facts from the court of law, is actually playing fraud with the court – Maxim supressio veri, expression faisi, i.e. suppression of the truth is equivalent to the expression of falsehood, gets attracted – Maxims. [Para 7].
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Neutral Citation	2024 INSC 46
Petitioner	Kusha Duruka
Respondent	The State Of Odisha
SCR	[2024] 1 S.C.R. 604
Judgement Date	2024-01-19
Case Number	303

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Kusha Duruka Vs. The State of Odisha

Please Log-in to view this content

Dalip Singh Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

K.d. Sharma Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. & Ors.

M/s. Pahwa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi

Baradakanta Mishra Vs. Mr. Justice Gatikrushna Mishra

Jeetu @ Jitendera & Ors Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Yashoda (alias Sodhan) Vs. Sukhwinder Singh and Others

Habib Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Sardar Estates Vs. Atma Ram Properties (p) Ltd.

Sukhdev Singh Sodhi Vs. The Chief Justice and Judges of The Pepsu High Court.

Kusha Duruka Vs. The State of Odisha

Kusha Duruka Vs. The State of Odisha

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Dalip Singh Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

K.d. Sharma Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. & Ors.

M/s. Pahwa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi

Baradakanta Mishra Vs. Mr. Justice Gatikrushna Mishra

Jeetu @ Jitendera & Ors Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Yashoda (alias Sodhan) Vs. Sukhwinder Singh and Others

Habib Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Sardar Estates Vs. Atma Ram Properties (p) Ltd.

Sukhdev Singh Sodhi Vs. The Chief Justice and Judges of The Pepsu High Court.

Kusha Duruka Vs. The State of Odisha