Pratap Kumar Biswal Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2024)

Pratap Kumar Biswal Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Condonation of 132 days' delay in filing the criminal appeal granted and I.A. No.2859 of 2023 disposed of; no interference with the impugned charge-framing order dated 02.03.2023; objections regarding proceeding without original documents and inadmissibility of documents left to be raised at the final argument stage, with the trial Court directed to consider them in accordance with law and expedite the trial; urgent certified copy ordered on proper application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 132 days in preferring the criminal appeal should be condoned (I.A. No.2859 of 2023). +2 more

Court's answer

The delay of 132 days in filing the CRLA is condoned, and I.A. No.2859 of 2023 is disposed of.

Ratio / Principle

Since the trial has already progressed and the appellant is participating in the trial, the High Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned charge-framing order at this stage.

Key takeaways

The points regarding the trial proceeding without original documents and the alleged inadmissibility of documents produced before the trial Court can be very well taken at the stage of final argument; the learned trial Court is to consider the same in accordance with law and expedite the trial.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (S.K. Sahoo, J.), Order dated 13.02.2024 — CRLA No.908 of 2023 (Pratap Kumar Biswal v. State of Odisha): (i) I.A. No.2859 of 2023 seeking condonation of 132 days' delay in preferring the criminal appeal — delay condoned and I.A. disposed of. (ii) The appeal, filed under section 13 of the O.P.I.D. Act, challenged the order dated 02.03.2023 of the Presiding Officer, Designated Court under the OPID Act, Balasore in C.T. No.3(C) of 2019 framing charges under sections 420/406/467/468/471/120-B of the I.P.C. read with sections 4,5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and section 6 of the O.P.I.D. Act, 2011. (iii) Since the trial had already progressed (some witnesses examined) and the appellant was participating in the trial, the High Court declined to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. (iv) Objections that the trial was proceeding without original documents and that documents produced were inadmissible were held capable of being taken at the stage of final argument; the trial Court was directed to consider them in accordance with law and expedite the trial. CRLA disposed of; urgent certified copy ordered on proper application.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.908 of 2023

Pratap Kumar Biswal

Appellant

Mr. C. Samantaray, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Respondent

Mr. J.P. Patra, Special Counsel (OPID)

CORAM:

JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

Order No.

ORDER 13.02.2024

I.A. No.2859 of 2023

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical Mode).

This is an application for condonation of delay of 132 days in preferring the criminal appeal.

Heard Mr. Chandan Samantaray, learned counsel for the petitioner through virtual mode and Mr. J.P. Patra, learned Special Counsel for the State of Odisha in the OPID Act matter.

After going through the averments taken in the interim application and on hearing the learned counsel for both the parties, I am inclined to condone the delay in filing the CRLA.

Accordingly, delay is condoned.

I.A. is accordingly disposed of.

(S.K. Sahoo)

Judge CRLA No.908 of 2023

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

// 2 //

Heard Mr. Chandan Samantaray, learned counsel for the petitioner through virtual mode and Mr. J.P. Patra, learned Special Counsel for the State of Odisha in the OPID Act matter.

This appeal has been filed under section 13 of the O.P.I.D. Act challenging the order dated 02.03.2023 passed by the Presiding Officer, Designated Court under the OPID Act, Balasore in C.T. No.3(C) of 2019 in framing charges under sections 420/406/467/468/471/120-B of the I.P.C. read with sections 4,5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and section 6 of the O.P.I.D. Act, 2011.

The impugned order reveals that the case was posted for recording of evidence of the witnesses on 28.03.2023 & 29.03.2023 and summons were issued to the charge sheet witnesses.

When a query is made to the learned counsel for the appellant regarding the status of the case, he submits that some of the witnesses have already been examined.

In view of such statements, since the trial has already progressed and the appellant is participating in the trial, at this stage, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.

Learned counsel for the appellant however, submits that without the original documents, the learned trial Court is proceeding with the trial and the documents, which were produced before the learned trial Court, are inadmissible. These points can be very well taken at the stage of final argument and the learned trial Court is to consider the same in accordance with law and expedite the trial.

The CRLA is accordingly disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order on proper application.

Signature Not Verified

(S.K. Sahoo) Judge

Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTYamit Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 15-Feb-2024 14:16:42