Dismissed

Sarangadhar Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Nov 2020CRLMC/325/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the application to quash non-bailable warrants and criminal proceedings. Though co-accused were acquitted, the petitioner remained an absconder and did not face trial. The court found no merit to quash proceedings before trial completion.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner at liberty to surrender before concerned court for bail consideration in the first half of the same day.

Sarangadhar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Quashing and FIR | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

CRLMC No.325 of 2020

¶2

3 05.11.2020 This matter is taken up through video conferencing.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State-opp.party.

¶4

The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the NBW issued against him under Annexure-3 as well as the criminal proceeding in G.R. No. 98 of 2018 pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Banpur. It is contended by the petitioner that he is one of the accused in the aforesaid G.R. Case for commission of offences under Section 498-A/304-B/406/34 of I.P.C. and Section 4 of D.P. Act. The petitioner is the father in-law of the deceased. It is submitted that in the meantime, the husband and mother in-law of the deceased, i.e. the other co-accused persons have been acquitted from the offences after facing their trial and placing reliance on the judgment delivered by the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Khurda in S.T. Case No. 102 of 2018, it is further submitted that no case is made out against the present petitioner in view of the evidence adduced by different witnesses in the said trial.

¶5

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that whatever evidence brought on record in that trial where the present petitioner was not an accused in the trial, the same cannot be taken by the present petitioner in his benefit.

¶6

Admittedly, the petitioner remained absconded and

¶7

¶8

¶9

did not face trial along with the husband and mother inlaw of the deceased. It is not in the case of the petitioner that there is no material against him for the alleged offences in the police report (charge sheet). Therefore, considering the submissions of both the parties, I do not find any merit in the submission of the petitioner to quash the criminal proceeding at this stage in view of the fact that the petitioner has to face his trial in due course of law.

¶10

Accordingly, the CRLMC is dismissed.

¶11

However, since NBW of arrest has been issued against the petitioner, he is at liberty to surrender before the concerned court below and in such event, the learned court below shall consider his prayer for bail as per law in the first half of the same day.

¶12

….………………… B.P.Routray, J.

Sarangadhar Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarangadhar Sahoo v. State of Odisha

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

Sumanta Barik Vs State of Odisha

Rukya Khatoon@Rukia Khatoon Vs State of Odisha

Ramesh Dharua Vs State of Odisha

Kailash Chandra Panda Vs State of Odisha

Parameswar Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Gyanendra Kumar Barik@Gania Vs State of Odisha