Disposed

Dillip Ku.Mohanty v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC19 Dec 2016CRLMC/3786/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court held that pronouncing a conviction judgment in the absence of the accused is illegal. It disposed of pending bail applications and granted liberty to file fresh applications before the trial court with liberty to pray for bail.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of CRLMs with liberty to file bail applications before trial court within ten working days, with liberty to pray for bail.

Dillip Ku.Mohanty Vs State of Orissa — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Orissa HC (2016)

¶1

CRLMC No. 3786 of 2016

¶2

CRLMC Nos. 3786 and 3791 of 2016

¶3

19.12.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel.
 The petitioners in both the cases are accused in G.R. Case No.245 of 2001 of the court
 of learned S.D.J.M., Banki, arising out of Bnki P.S. Case no.179 of 2001. It was posted on 16
.11.2016 for pronouncement of judgment. All the petitioners were absent. Learned S.D.J.M., Ban
ki recorded that the accused persons are found guilty of the offences under Sections 420, 466,
 468, 471, 409 and 120-B/34 of the I.P.C. and convicted them.

¶4

 The procedure adopted by him is illegal. A judgment can only be pronounced in presence
of the accused in case of conviction. In case of acquittal, it can be pronounced in absence of
 the accused, but in presence of the representing lawyer. Learned counsel appearing for the ac
cused persons has also filed a petition under Section 317 of the Cr.P.C., which was rejected a
nd the judgment was directed to be kept in sealed cover.

¶5

 Since the procedure adopted by the learned S.D.J.M., Banki is illegal, both the Crl. Mi
sc. Cases are disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to file applications for bail befo
re the aforesaid court within ten working days and pray for bail. On such event, their applica
tions for bail shall be considered and after disposal of their bail application, the learned S
.D.J.M., shall proceed to pronounce the conviction judgment and sentence of imprisonment.
 Urgent certified copy of this order shall be granted on proper application.

¶6

..........
 S.K.Mishra, J.

Dillip Ku.Mohanty v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dillip Ku.Mohanty v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahendra Swain@Rajesh Vs State of Orissa

Samudraya Khuda@Samudraya Kulu Vs State of Orissa

Dhaniram Gond Vs State of Orissa

Mukunda Ch.Mallick Vs State of Orissa

Chakradhar Patrihary Vs State of Orissa

Radhashyam Mallik Vs State of Orissa