Manoj Behera@Sushanta@Olla Vs State of Odisha

The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, under section 14A of the SC/S.T. (PoA) Act, 1989 has assailed the order dated 9^th February, 2024 passed by the learned Presiding Officer under S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act, Cuttack in C.T. Case No.151 of 2020.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned counsel for the Informant as also learned counsel for the State.

¶23

By the impugned order, the Trial Court in course of trial has again framed charge against the Appellant for commission

¶24

Page 1 of 3 .

¶25

of offence under section 3(1)(w)(i) of the S.C./S.T. (PoA) Act. It be stated that the accused was facing the trial for commission of the offences under section 376(2)(n)/365/34 of the IPC read with section 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) of the S.C./S.T. (PoA) Act.

¶26

Learned counsel for the Appellant while not disputing the position except the position that the Trial Court has the power to adopt the course of framing charge for another offence in course of trial, however, submits that in this situation when the Trial Court has framed charge for commission of offence under section 3(1)(w) of the S.C./S.T. (PoA) Act, the Appellant should have been given the opportunity to cross-examine all the prosecution witnesses examined by then and that having not been given, the Appellant has been highly prejudiced.

¶27

Learned counsel for the State and Informant submit that here the Appellant was facing the trial for commission of offence under section 3(2)(v)/3(2)(v)(a) of the S.C./S.T. (PoA) Act and in view of the evidence of the victim recorded during the trial, the Trial Court has also framed the charge for commission of offence under section 3(1)(w) of the S.C./S.T. (PoA) Act. It is, therefore, submitted that the Trial Court did commit no error in proceeding with the trial from that stage onwards without putting the feet back.

¶28

Taking into account the submissions made, the impugned order being gone through, it is found that the Appellant was very much facing the trial for the offence under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and now charge has been framed for another offence under that Act. In that view of the matter, this Court in the interest of fair trial is inclined to dispose of this Appeal

¶29

Page 2 of 3 .

¶30

providing opportunity to the Appellant to further cross-examine the victim.

¶31

Accordingly, the Appellant and the Respondent No.2 are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 18^th June, 2024 to receive further instruction.

¶32