The High Court of Orissa disposed of a criminal revision petition filed under Section 401 read with 397 CrPC challenging an order of taking cognizance. The court held that nothing survived after the lapse of 10 years and absence of interim orders.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLREV No. 771 of 2013
Kedar Charan Swain
…. Petitioner
None
-versus-
State of Odisha
…. Opp. Party
Mr. D. Nayak, Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
Order No.
ORDER 14.11.2023
Hybrid Mode
// 2 //
cognizance by the learned court at the first instance and there has been no interim order, nothing would survive at preset for adjudication before this Court. 4. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate referring to the order impugned submits that nothing survives at present after lapse of 10 years. 5. Having heard the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, the petition stands disposed of.
(M.S. Sahoo)
Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: RADHARANI JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 24-Nov-2023 14:39:30
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal revision petition challenging an impugned order of taking cognizance survives given the lapse of time and lack of interim orders.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kedar Charan Swain
State of Odisha
M.S. SAHOO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
