Dismissed

Bipin Bihari Jayasingh v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC19 Apr 2024CRLMC/1750/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking recall of a judgment that set aside cognizance of an offence under Section 3 SC & ST (PoA) Act. The Court held that recall is barred as the prior judgment followed a contested hearing where the informant was represented.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking recall of the judgment dated 1st March, 2023 is dismissed.

Bipin Bihari Jayasingh Vs State of Odisha — Caste Atrocities | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.1750 of 2023

¶3

Bipin Bihari Jayasingh …. Petitioner M/s. Prasant Verma, Advocate & Associates

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

State of Odisha & another …. Opposite Parties Mr. Priyabrata Tripathy, ASC

¶6

CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

19.04.2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State.

¶12

Instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioner to recall of the judgment dated 1^st March, 2023 passed in CRLMC No.2636 of 2021 and for appropriate orders with reference to the offence under Section 3 SC & ST (PoA) Act.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is immensely prejudiced and therefore, the impugned judgment in CRLMC No.2636 of 2021 is required to be recalled with consequential direction to the learned court below. In fact, it is submitted that there was no opportunity of hearing provided to the petitioner at the time of disposal of CRLMC No.2636 of 2021 and the same has prejudiced him, hence, the impugned judgment dated 1^st March, 2023 passed therein deserves to be recalled in the interest of justice.

¶14

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that such recall is impermissible since there has been a contested disposal.

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

Considered the grounds upon which such recall is prayed for at the behest of the petitioner. The petitioner is not the informant but he claims to have been effected on account of the alleged occurrence dated 29^th April, 2017.

¶17

The Court after having considered the evidence and material on record reached at a conclusion that no offence under Section 3 SC & ST (PoA) Act has been made out and to the said extent, set aside the order of cognizance dated 13^th April, 2021 and it was in the immediate presence of informant that the hearing of the matter was taken up and was disposed of by the Court. In other words, the informant was represented at the time of hearing. With the hearing having taken place in presence of the informant, the Court is of the considered view that on any such ground, which has been raised at present by the petitioner, no case for recall of the judgment dated 1^st March, 2023 in CRLMC No.2636 of 2021 is made out. Such recall of judgment with a contested disposal is barred in view of Section 363 Cr.P.C. In other words, the ground which has been raised by the petitioner, in the humble view of the Court, is not sufficient to recall the judgment. In fact, the petitioner’s interest has been well defended by the State and that too, in the presence of the informant, the hearing has taken place, so therefore, the conclusion of the Court is that no case is made out for interference vis-à-vis the impugned judgment in CRLMC No.2636 of 2021.

¶18

Hence, it is ordered.

¶19

In the result, the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands dismissed.

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Balaram

¶22

Digitally Signed Signed by: BALARAM BEHERA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 22-Apr-2024 11:13:41

¶23

Page 2 of 2

Bipin Bihari Jayasingh v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bipin Bihari Jayasingh 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

Dhyana Ranjan Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Rasmita Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Duryadhan Baral Vs State of Odisha

Sukru Behera Vs State of Odisha

Dharmananda Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Dharmananda Nayak Vs State of Odisha