Disposed

Artha Chhatria v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC7 Jan 2020CRLMP/1412/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, without expressing an opinion on merits, granted liberty to the petitioner to move the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for directing proper investigation within two weeks, citing Supreme Court precedents regarding investigation delays.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to move jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. within two weeks; CRLMP disposed of without opinion on merits.

Artha Chhatria Vs State of Orissa — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

CRLMP No. 1412 of 2017

¶2

10 07.01.2020 Heard Mr. K.K. Rout, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Senapati, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State opposite parties, and perused the record.

¶3

The petitioner files this application to quash the letter of C.B.I. dated 29.12.2016 and seeks direction to C.B.I. to undertake and conclude the investigation into the rape and murder of the daughter of the petitioner and take appropriate legal action against the culprits within a stipulated period.

¶4

Mr. B. Senapati, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State, relying on the decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases of Sakiri Vasu V. State of U.P. reported in ( 2008) 2 SCC 409 and Sudhir Bhaskar Rao Tambe V. Hemant Yashwant Dhage reported in (2016) 6 SCC 277 , submits that instead of moving the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C., the petitioner has unnecessarily rushed to this Court. He further submits that in the aforesaid decision, the Supreme Court has made it clear that when after registering the F.I.R., if no proper investigation is made, it would be open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate and if such an application under Section 156(3) is filed before the learned Magistrate, he/she can direct for a proper investigation.

¶5

In such background, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to move the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C.

¶6

Considering the submissions made, this Court, without

¶7

¶8

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, grants liberty to the petitioner to move the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. within a period of two weeks. In the event, such an application is filed, the jurisdictional Magistrate would do well to proceed with the same in accordance with law.

¶9

The CRLMP is accordingly disposed of.

¶10

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶11

Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.

¶12

Alok

¶13

Artha Chhatria v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Artha Chhatria 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chinmaya Patra Vs State of Odisha

Shantanu Ku.Mahalik Vs Commnr.-Cum-Secy.

Prasanta Kumar Dash Vs Truptirani Rath

Jyotshnarani Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Jema Tarei Vs State of Orissa

Ratnakar Pani Vs Sasmita Pani