Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Prahalad Sethy And Another vs State Of Orissa .... Opposite Party on 13 July, 2023

Author: Savitri Ratho

Bench: Savitri Ratho

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                            CRLMC No. 1962 of 2022
      Prahalad Sethy and Another     ....                      Petitioners
                                                Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate
                                 Versus
      State of Orissa                ....                Opposite Party
                                                  Ms. S. Patnaik, AGA

             CORAM:
                       JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
                                        ORDER

13.07.2023 Order No.

03. (Through hybrid mode)

1. Mr. A.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to remove the defect no.10 in Court today.

2. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No. 556 of 1997 which is pending against the petitioners in the Court of learned C.J.M., Dhenkanal which arises out of Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No. 162 of 1997 registered under Section 409 of the I.P.C.

3. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No. 162 of 1997, on 13.08.1999 final report true FRT under Section 409 of I.P.C. on the ground of insufficient evidence had been filed stating that during the course of investigation, in spite of repeated request, the Sub-Collector, Dhenkanal failed to produce the audit report in respect of the appropriate amount. After receipt of the special audit report, investigation was taken up on 22.09.2000 and chargesheet was submitted on 30.01.2003. He further submits that the special audit report is an antedated document and he also submits that trial had commenced in the case but after 15.12.2021 when cross-

// 2 // examination of P.W.9 had been completed, there has been no progress in the trial. As a result the petitioners are facing still prosecution in a case where F.I.R. was registered in the year 1997 and this amounts to abuse of the process of court.

4. List this matter on 04.08.2023. Meanwhile, Registry is directed to call for a report from the court of the learned C.J.M.-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in G.R. Case No. 556 of 1997 regarding status of the trial and the reasons for non-completion of the trial till date.

5. The learned trial court shall also be requested to send a copy of the order if any passed after 15.12.2021.

.........................

(Savitri Ratho) Judge Puspa Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 13-Jul-2023 18:50:17 Page 2 of 2