Disposed¶19

Aruna Panda@Aruna Kumar Panda v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Apr 2024CRLMC/387/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 457 Cr.P.C.; release of seized articles/seized property; scrap business ('scarp business' as printed); ownership documents and invoices; rejection set aside; Sessions Judge Jajpur; Criminal Revision No.19 of 2024; petitioner relegated/remanded to move fresh application; decision within fifteen days; consideration on own merit; Orissa High Court Cuttack; CRLMC; S.S. Mishra. Relevant for advocates handling seized-property release applications remitted for a fresh decision with supporting documents.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 12.01.2024 of the learned Sessions Judge, Jajpur (Criminal Revision No.19 of 2024) set aside; petitioner relegated to the Court below with liberty to move a fresh application with supporting documents, to be decided within fifteen days of filing. ¶19

Aruna Panda@Aruna Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's application for release of the seized articles was rightly rejected on the ground that he failed to establish engagement in the scrap business, despite the invoices and documents submitted regarding his profession and ownership of the seized property. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

The petitioner should at the first instance approach the Court below with all documents relating to his profession and proving ownership over the seized property, by moving a fresh application with the necessary documents within two weeks; if filed, such application shall be considered on its own merit.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jajpur in Criminal Revision No.19 of 2024 is set aside, and the petitioner is relegated to the Court below with liberty to move a fresh application.

¶18

Key takeaways

If the fresh application is filed before the Court below, it shall be decided within a period of fifteen days from the filing of the said application.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (Cuttack) — CRLMC No.387 of 2024 (S.S. Mishra, J.), disposed 10.04.2024. Petitioner challenged rejection (order dt. 12.01.2024, learned Sessions Judge, Jajpur, Criminal Revision No.19 of 2024) of his application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for release of seized articles; counsel contended the invoices and documents substantiating his scrap-business profession and ownership were not properly considered. The High Court set aside the rejection order, directed the petitioner to approach the Court below afresh with all documents as to profession and ownership within two weeks, ordered such application to be considered on its own merit and decided within fifteen days of filing, and disposed of the CRLMC.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.387 of 2024

¶3

Aruna Panda @ Aruna …. Petitioner Kumar Panda

¶4

Mr. S.K. Jena, Advocate -versus-

¶5

State of Odisha …. Opp. Party

¶6

Mr. P.K. Maharaj, ASC

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order No.

1 . Heard.

ORDER

10.04.2024

2 . The petitioner has moved an application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jajpur. Vide order dated 12.01.2024 the said application has been rejected. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present case.

¶15

3 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the rejection order is devoid of merit because the trial Court has rejected the application on the ground that he could not establish the fact that he is engaged in the profession of scarp business. Apart from that the invoices which he had placed on record has not been considered in right prospective. In the present case,

¶16

the petitioner has filed certain documents to substantiate his case for release of the seized articles. Therefore, he seeks indulgence of this Court.

¶17

4 . Therefore, I am of the considered view that the petitioner at the first instance should approach the Court below with all documents in respect to his profession and the document proving his ownership over the seized property. The petitioner is directed to approach afresh by moving an application along with necessary documents within two weeks hence. If such an application is filed before the Court below, the same shall be considered on its own merit.

¶18

5 . Having regard to the observation made above, the order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jajpur in Criminal Revision No.19 of 2024 is set aside. The petitioner is relegated to the Court below with a liberty to move a fresh application. If such application is filed, the same shall be decided within a period of fifteen days from the filing of the said application.

¶19

6 . The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.

¶20

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, amit CU TTACK Date: 15-Apr-2024 11:58:53

¶23

Aruna Panda@Aruna Kumar Panda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aruna Panda@Aruna Kumar Panda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sankar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Narasimhamurty Panigrahi Vs Saroj Kumar Panda

Kuna@Sri Rama Krushna Jena Vs State of Odisha

Jagannath Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Ananda Chandra Behera Vs State of Odisha

Bhagabat Murmu Vs State of Odisha