Disposed

Amit Kumar Rajgadia v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC21 Jul 2022CRLMC/1719/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings. The Court held that non-production of documents cannot quash an FIR once a charge sheet is filed, but directed the trial court to ensure compliance with its earlier order.

What did the court decide?

Directed trial court to proceed with trial and compliance; liberty given to raise non-production issue at charge framing stage.

Amit Kumar Rajgadia Vs State of Odisha — Quashing and FIR | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.1719 of 2022

¶3

Amit Rajgadia and another

¶4

…. Petitioners

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE S. PUJAHARI

Order No.

ORDER 21.07.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioners with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. and criminal proceeding in connection with G.R. Case No.2065 of 2019, corresponding to Chauliaganj P.S. Case No.476 of 2019, pending before the Court of J.M.F.C. (City), Cuttack. Now, charge sheet has been filed and cognizance stated to have been taken.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned counsel for the State-Opposite Party No.1.

¶15

It appears that in the charge sheet, some of the documents stated to have been seized by the I.O., but not produced before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate in seisin over the matter has called for those documents, out of which, some of the documents were produced, but one document has not been produced. As such, he has called for explanation from the I.O., who has seized the documents. In spite of the same, neither any explanation has been given nor the

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

document is produced and, as such, the case was posted to 14^th December, 2021 for submission of show cause.

¶19

The Petitioner has filed this petition for quashment of the F.I.R. on the ground that since the entire documents has not been produced, the F.I.R. is bad. But in the meanwhile, charge sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken. The same can hardly be a ground to quash the F.I.R. which has already been ended in filing the charge sheet.

¶20

However, the trial court is directed to proceed with the matter for compliance of its order, if not already done in appropriate manner, and also proceed with the trial. Liberty is given to the Petitioner to raise the contention at the time of framing of charge, if the non-production of the documents would militate a charge to frame against the Petitioner, the trial court shall consider the same in proper perspective.

¶21

With the aforesaid order, this CRLMC stands disposed of.

¶22

(S. Pujahari) Judge

¶23

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Amit Kumar Rajgadia v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Rajgadia 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

Nityananda Jena Vs State of Odisha

Prasanta Ku.Mohanty Vs State

Dillip Sarangi Vs State of Odisha

Debabrata Acharya Vs State of Odisha

Brajabandhu Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Kartikeswar Brahma Vs State of Odisha