Dismissed¶20

State v. Babula Behera

Orissa HC21 Nov 2025CRLLP/137/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court at Cuttack; CRLLP No.137 of 2010; Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra; order dated 21.11.2025; State of Orissa v. Babula Behera & Anr.; leave application under Section 378 Cr.P.C. to appeal against acquittal; acquittal judgment dated 06.08.2010 by Sessions Judge, Kandhamal in S.T No.122 of 2009; charges under Sections 294/506/34 IPC read with Section 3(1)(x) SC & ST (PoA) Act; obscene language and criminal intimidation; delay of almost one and a half decades; interests of justice; leave application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

On a critical analysis of the impugned judgment, the learned trial court committed no illegality and there are no problems in the acquittal judgment ¶19

State Vs Babula Behera — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLLP No.137 of 2010

¶2

State of Orissa

¶3

..... Petitioner

¶4

Represented By Adv. - Addl.govt.advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Babula Behera & Anr.

¶7

..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. -

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

21.11.2025

Order No.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/ Physical Mode).

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.

¶15

By filing the present application under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. the Petitioner-State seeks to prefer an appeal against judgment dated 06.08.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kandhamal in S.T No.122 of 2009.

¶16

On perusal of the impugned judgment it appears that the Opposite Party-accused persons, who happen to be husband and wife, faced the charges under Section 294/506/34 of I.P.C. read with Section 3(1)(x) of the SC & ST (PoA) Act. As per the prosecution case Opposite Parties used obscene languages in a public place against the victim cause a criminal intimidation. On perusal of the judgment of the learned trial court dated 06.08.2010, it appears that

¶17

Page 1 of 2.

¶18

the learned trial court has delivered a detailed judgment taking into consideration then the entire prosecution evidence. Finally, the learned trial court has come to a conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt and as such, the accused persons have been given the benefit of doubt and they have been acquitted of all charges.

¶19

On a critical analysis of the impugned judgment, this Court found that the learned trial court has not committed any illegality and there are no problems in the judgment. Moreover, taking into consideration the gravity and seriousness of the allegation, this Court is of the view that it would be against the interests of justice to grant leave after expiry of almost one and half decades to prefer an appeal against the judgment of acquittal. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the leave application.

¶20

6. Accordingly, the leave application stands dismissed.

¶21

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge

¶22

Rubi

¶23

Page 2 of 2.

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Nov-2025 10:51:54