Disposed

Satyanarayan Patro v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 Feb 2023CRLMC/287/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an order taking cognizance of offences charged to the petitioners, the Court held that the question of fraud, requiring examination of materials at trial, cannot be adjudicated at this stage. The Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to claim discharge and directing the petitioners to surrender for bail.

What did the court decide?

The petition is disposed of; petitioners are directed to surrender for bail if done by 25th February 2023 and are granted liberty to seek discharge during enquiry.

Satyanarayan Patro Vs State of Odisha — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.287 of 2023

¶3

Satyanarayan Patro & Others

¶4

Petitioners

¶5

Mr. A.K.Sahoo, Advocate

-Versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opposite Party

Mr. Sitikanta Mishra, ASC

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

Order No.

ORDER 06.02.2023

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the State.

¶16

Instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioners for quashing of the impugned order dated 18^th June, 2018 passed in connection with G.R. Case No.414 of 2017 corresponding to I.C.C. Case No. 15 of 2016 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Chatrapur on the grounds stated therein.

¶17

Copy of the F.I.R. is at Anneuxre-1 and Annexure-2 is the copy of the chargesheet.

¶18

The petitioners have been chargesheeted for offences under Sections 182,198 & 420 read with 34 IPC.

¶19

Impugned order is at Annxure-3 by which the learned court below has taken cognizance of the alleged offences against the petitioners.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the informant is one of the sisters of petitioner No.1 and she alleged that her share was recorded in the name of petitioner No.1 by fraudulent means. On lodging of such report as per Annexure-1, Chatrapur P.S. Case No. 179 of 2017 was registered which finally led to submission of chargesheet under Annexure-2.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it was with the consent of other sisters as well as the informant that the property was exclusively recorded in the name of petitioner No.1 and therefore, there was no fraud committed by the latter but with false allegations the F.I.R. i.e. Anneuxre-1 was lodged later to which Chatrapur P.S. Case No. 179 was registered for the alleged offences.

¶22

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that there is no error or wrong committed by the learned court below as after investigation, the local police submitted the chargesheet i.e. Annexure-2.

¶23

Whether there was any fraud played upon the informant by the petitioners or otherwise is a matter which is to be examined by the learned court below considering the materials collected and submitted along with chargesheet i.e. Annexure-2. So, therefore, at the present stage, the Court is of the view that such a disputed question of fact whether it was without the consent of the informant co-sharer, petitioner No.1 recorded the property exclusively in his name cannot be adjudicated upon. It should therefore be left for the learned court below to examine during and in course of an enquiry and trial. In other words, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order i.e. Anneuxre-3. However, the Court is also of the view that the petitioners should be granted liberty to approach before the learned court and claim for discharge during enquiry.

¶24

10. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶25

In the result, the CRLMC stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to surrender before the court of learned SDJM, Chatrapur in G.R. Case No.414 of 2017 corresponding to Chatrapur P.S. Case No. 179 dated 1^st December, 2017 and in the event they surrender on or before 25^th February, 2023, the court below shall release them on bail. Furthermore, the petitioners are hereby granted the liberty to raise all such grounds before learned court below seeking discharge during enquiry and in the event any such application so moved by them, the court below shall consider the same and pass appropriate order thereon as per and in accordance with law.

¶26

A certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge

¶27

kabita

Satyanarayan Patro v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyanarayan Patro 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

Rabindra Sethi Vs State of Odisha

Ratanalu@Ratnalu Ramesh Vs State of Odisha

Benua Patra Vs State of Odisha

Dhaniram Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Tathagat Sahoo@Tuna Vs State of Odisha

Sanjay Baliarsingh@Sanjay Kumar Baliarsingh Vs State of Odisha