Dismissed

Balaram Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC8 May 2024TRPCRL/38/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Odisha dismissed a transfer application filed by the petitioner-accused. The Court held that alleged refusal to allow cross-examination, delay in fixing dates, and vague misbehavior are not valid grounds to transfer a case, as remedies lie in appealing or seeking clarification, not shifting jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Petition for transfer of S.T. Case No. 112 of 2022 from Salepur to Cuttack dismissed.

Balaram Behera Vs State of Odisha — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

TRPCRL No. 38 of 2024

¶3

Balaram Behera & Anr

¶4

.… Petitioners Represented by Mr. S.R.Rout, Advocate

¶5

Versus -

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

.… Opp. Party Represented by AGA

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

ORDER

08.05.2024

Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

The petitioners are facing trial as against accused persons in S.T. Case No. 112 of 2022 pending in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Salepur. The transfer of the case from the said Court to the Court of learned sessions Judge, Cuttack. The grounds cited are as follows;

¶16

(i) On 12.03.2024 the prosecution examined P.W.4 and when the defence counsel wanted to cross-examine the Trial Court did not allow him to put a particular question regarding shoes.

¶17

(ii) The Trial Court is not cooperating with the advocate and the accused persons and there is no sympathy and mentioned in writing in the cross-examination regarding non-relevance of the questions put.

¶18

(iii) The Trial Court despite requests of the accused persons did not fix a suitable date and allegedly misbehaved with the defence counsel as well as the accused persons.

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

According to the considered view of this Court, these cannot be reasons for transferring a case from one Court to another. If, according to the defence certain relevant questions were not allowed to be put, it is always open to it to challenge such order of the Trial Court before the higher forum. As regards the non-fixing of a suitable date by the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that looking at the stage of trial a date suitable to all parties including the Court can always be fixed but only because a particular date was not fixed by the Court cannot be a reason to doubt the fairness of the presiding Judge. As regards the so-called misbehavior allegedly exhibited by the presiding Judge, this Court finds the same entirely non-specific and vague so as to take cognizance of. 4. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer for transfer of the case. The transfer application is therefore, dismissed.

¶21

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶22

Deepak

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEEPAK PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,Cuttack Date: 09-May-2024 13:08:07

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Balaram Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balaram Behera 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tukuna Mallik@Kamadev Mallik Vs State of Odisha

Suresh Chandra Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Rajesh Jena @ Amar Vs State of Odisha

Bijay Muduli Vs State of Odisha

Deepaka Das Vs State

Kanhei Charan Nayak Vs State of Odisha