CRLREV No. 140 of 2016. Case: Bharat Kumar Patra and Ors. Vs State of Orissa. High Court of Orissa (India)

Case NumberCRLREV No. 140 of 2016
CounselFor Appellant: Basanta Kumar Das, Adv. and For Respondents: Dillip Kumar Mishra, Addl. Govt. Advocate
JudgesS.K. Sahoo, J.
IssueArms Act, 1959 - Sections 25, 27; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 319; Explosives Act, 1884 - Section 9B; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 294, 34, 427, 436, 506
Judgement DateJanuary 02, 2017
CourtHigh Court of Orissa (India)

Judgment:

S.K. Sahoo, J.

  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

  2. This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners namely Bharat Kumar Patra, Narendra Patra, Babaji Charan Behera, Jayanta Kumar Mohanty, Bhim Sen Behera @ Kamal Lochan Behera, Chaitanya Behera, Ganesh Behera and Thakur Charan Patra challenging the impugned order dated 14.12.2015 passed by the learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Balasore in Sessions Trial No. 9/438 of 2010/2009 in allowing the petition filed by the State under section 319 of the Cr.P.C. and directing issuance of summons against the petitioners to face trial along with other charge sheeted accused persons.

  3. It appears that the F.I.R. was lodged on 18.05.2009 by one Mihir Pani before Inspector in charge, Soro police station, on the basis of which Soro P.S. Case No. 130 of 2009 was registered under sections 436/427/294/506 Part-II/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and section 9-B of the Explosives Act and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted on 20.10.2009 under sections 436/427/294/506 Part-II/34 of the Indian Penal Code against twelve accused persons. The petitioners were not charge sheeted.

  4. During course of trial of the charge sheeted accused persons, four witnesses were examined including the informant Mihir Pani as P.W. 1. The other three witnesses are P.W. 2 Sesadev Rout, P.W. 3 Badri Narayan Mohanty and P.W. 4 Madhab Pani. After examination of the aforesaid four witnesses, the prosecution filed a petition on 29.04.2015 under section 319 of the Cr.P.C. to implead the petitioners as accused persons in the case to face trial. The learned Trial Court vide impugned order dated 14.12.2015 has been pleased to hold that on perusal of the F.I.R. as well as the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 4, prima facie materials are made out against the petitioners and therefore, it is necessary to implead them as accused persons for proper adjudication of the case and accordingly, directed for issuance of summons against the petitioners.

  5. Mr. Basant Kumar Das, learned counsel for the petitioners challenging the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court contended that though in the F.I.R., the names of the some of the petitioners finds place but the 161 Cr.P.C. statement of the informant indicates that he is not an occurrence witness and he got information about the occurrence from others and accordingly lodged the first...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT