DANDAPANI ROUT Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the accused persons in G. R. Case No. 25 of 1984 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Banpur. Some of the petitioners were released on anticipatory bail by this Court and the other petitioners were released on bail by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Khurda, exercising the power of the Court of Session under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the Code). On an application made by the Officer-in- charge of the police station stating that the petitioners had violated the conditions of the bail bonds, the learned Magistrate cancelled the bail and directed issue of non-bailable warrants of arrest against the petitioners. This order is sought to be quashed in exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rath, the learned Additional Standing Counsel.

(3.) The inherent jurisdiction of this Court is to be exercised in rare and exceptional cases and in the interests of justice.