Dismissed¶¶22

Subash Chandra Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC21 Mar 2024CRLMC/610/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceeding refused despite inordinate trial delay; delay partly attributable to petitioner (absence, NWA pending execution 24.08.2012–13.09.2022); direction for expeditious completion of trial within two months; Section 482 Cr.P.C.; ST Case No.121 of 2013; Jharsuguda GRPS Case No.31 (4) of 2009; CRLMC No. 610 of 2024; earlier CRLMC No.4271 of 2022 order dated 06.01.2023; High Court of Orissa; R.K. Pattanaik, J.; speedy trial; expeditious disposal.

What did the court decide?

CRLMC dismissed, however with a direction to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda to expedite the hearing, examine the remaining prosecution witnesses, and complete the trial preferably within two months from receipt of a copy of the order. ¶¶22

Subash Chandra Mohanty Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal prosecution of the petitioner in ST Case No.121 of 2013 (Jharsuguda GRPS Case No.31 (4) of 2009) should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the ground of inordinate delay in completion of trial.

¶¶17

Court's answer

Notwithstanding the delay in the trial, which was also contributed by the petitioner (his absence and NWA pending execution against him from 24.08.2012 to 13.09.2022), the prosecution against him pending before the learned Sessions Court cannot be quashed.

¶¶20

Ratio / Principle

Since there has been delay in closure of trial, a direction is issued to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda to expedite the hearing, examine the remaining prosecution witnesses in ST Case No.121/2013 of 2009-10-13, and ensure completion of trial as soon as possible, preferably within two months from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal quashing — Section 482 Cr.P.C. — inordinate delay in trial — petition to quash proceeding in ST Case No.121 of 2013 (Jharsuguda GRPS Case No.31 (4) of 2009) pending before Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda — earlier order in CRLMC No.4271 of 2022 dated 6th January, 2023 directing disposal within four months not complied with — only one witness examined after that order; 03 of 11 prosecution witnesses examined — petitioner himself contributed to delay (remained absent; NWA pending execution against him from 24th August, 2012 till 13th September, 2022) — held, prosecution cannot be quashed notwithstanding the delay; CRLMC dismissed with direction to expedite hearing and complete trial preferably within two months from receipt of copy of order (R.K. Pattanaik, J.).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No. 610 of 2024

¶3

Subash Chandra Mohanty

¶4

Petitioners

¶5

Mr. S.R. Das, Advocate

-Versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opposite Party

Mr. Ishwar Mohanty, ASC

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

21.03.2024

1. Heard Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC for the State.

¶16

Instant petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashment of the proceeding in connection with ST Case No.121 of 2013 corresponding to Jharsuguda GRPS Case No.31 (4) of 2009 pending in the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda on the grounds stated therein.

¶17

Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court while disposing of CRLMC No.4271 of 2022 by order dated 6^th January, 2023 had directed the court below to dispose of the case within four months from then but it could not be accomplished. In view of inordinate delay, which has taken place in the meantime, Mr. Das further submits that the criminal prosecution against the petitioner should be quashed in the interest of justice.

¶18

The objection of Mr.Mohanty, learned ASC for the State is noted down.

¶19

Perused the report received from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda as at Flag-A and the same Page 1 of 2

¶20

reveals that the trial is posted to 29^th March, 2024. It is informed to the Court by Mr. Das that 03 witnesses from the side of prosecution have so far been examined out of 11. The said report further reveals that the petitioner was absent and NWA was pending execution against him on and from 24^th August, 2012 till 13^th September, 2022. So, there has been delay contributed by the petitioner as well. Of course, there is tardy progress in the trial as only one witness has been examined after the Court’s order in CRLMC No.4271 of 2022. Notwithstanding the delay which is also contributed by the petitioner, the Court is of the view that the prosecution against him pending before the learned Sessions Court cannot be quashed. The Court is also of the view that there has been delay in closure of trial, hence, a direction is required to be issued to the learned Sessions Court to expedite it and dispose of the case within a stipulated period.

¶21

Hence, it is ordered.

¶22

In the result, CRLMC stands dismissed, however, with a direction to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda to expedite the hearing examining rest of the witnesses of the prosecution in connection with ST Case No.121/ 2013 of 2009-10-13 and to ensure completion of trial as soon as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

Urgent copy of this order be issued as per rules.

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJINA SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CTC Date: 22-Mar-2024 18:11:52Rojina

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Subash Chandra Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subash Chandra Mohanty 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

Managerclaim,Shrir Vs Sadhu Ch.Mishra

Parsuram Duria Vs State of Odisha

Suka Behera Vs Sk.Mastan

Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Saraswati Barai

Manager T.P.Cell,Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Sagar Pr.Patra

Ranjit Kumar Patra Vs State of Odisha