Dismissed¶22

State of Orissa v. Surendra Jena

Orissa HC23 Sept 2025CRLLP/32/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, CRLLP No.32 of 2007, decided 23.09.2025 by Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra. State's leave petition under S.378(1) & (3) Cr.P.C. against acquittal dated 02.03.2006 (JMSC Jagatsinghpur, G.R. Case No.375 of 2000 / Trial No.98 of 2005; offences u/Ss.341, 323 & 34 IPC); 280-day delay not condoned; leave application dismissed as abuse of process and contrary to larger interests of justice. Advocates: U.R. Jena, AGA for State; none for opposite parties.

What did the court decide?

This Court is not inclined to condone the 280-day delay in filing the leave petition. ¶21

State of Orissa Vs Surendra Jena — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLLP No.32 of 2007

¶3

State Of Orissa

¶4

..... Petitioner

¶5

Mr. U.R. Jena, AGA

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Surendra Jena and others

¶8

..... Opposite Parties

¶9

None

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

23.09.2025

Order No.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶17

Heard learned Additional Government Advocate for the StatePetitioner. None appears for the Opposite Parties-accused.

¶18

The present application has been filed at the instance of the Petitioner-State under Section 378(1) & (3) of Cr.P.C. seeking leave to prefer an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 02.03.2006 passed by the learned J.M.S.C., Jagatsinghpur in G.R. Case No.375 of 2000, corresponding to Trial No.98 of 2005.

¶19

On perusal of the record, it appears that there exists a delay of 280 days in preparing the present leave petition. However, such delay has not been condoned as of now as the notice could not be served. Learned counsel for the State contended that there are two grounds to prefer an appeal against the judgment of acquittal.

¶20

Page 1 of 2.

¶21

However, taking into consideration the fact that the judgment is of the year 2006 and the present petition was filed in the year 2007 and till now the delay has not been condoned, further taking into consideration the fact that offences under Sections 341, 323 & 34 of IPC are involved, this Court is of the view that allowing the present proceeding to linger further would be abuse of the process of law and the same would not be in the larger interests of justice. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay.

¶22

Accordingly, the leave application stands dismissed.

¶23

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge

¶24

S.K. Rout

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Reason: Authentication Page 2 of 2. Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 25-Sep-2025 19:45:12

State of Orissa v. Surendra Jena

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Orissa v. Surendra Jena

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Vs Manoj Ku.Singh

State of Orissa Vs Sirapani Modi

State of Orissa Vs Bharini Pattnaik

Sushama Das Vs Harish Ch.Sahu

Asst.Regr.,Companies Vs M/S.a.C.E.Stone

Chakadola Sahu Vs Kailash Bisi