Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: ASKA in B. Badri Prasad Patra @ Rao @ vs State Of Odisha on 12 September, 2025Matching Fragments
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.
3. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant challenging the direction contained in the impugned judgment dtd.22.11.2011 of the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC, Aska, Ganjam in S.T. Case No. 20/2010 (PF)/83 of 2008 GDC, wherein while disposing the matter, a direction has been issued to confiscate the stolen property i.e. the seized silver ornaments and silver bars to the State Government.
4. It is the case of the Appellant that after initiation of the proceeding in Aska P.S. Case No. 282 of 2006, the alleged stolen properties along with the silver ornaments and silver bars were seized from the possession of the Appellant on 19.03.2007 with preparation of a seizure list. Appellant was also arrested on the said date and faced trial in S.T. Case No. 20/2010 (PF) in the file of learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Aska, Ganjam after the trial was split up. Appellant though faced the trial for the offence under Sec. 394/411 of the IPC, but he was acquitted vide judgment dtd.22.11.2011. But while so acquitting the Appellant, a direction was issued to confiscate the seized silver bar and silver ornaments to the State inter alia on the ground that there is no clear evidence regarding ownership of the stolen properties and no such claim has been made in that regard. Appellant is aggrieved by such direction of the learned trial court, so contained in the impugned judgment and is before this Court in the appeal in question.
4.1. It is contended that subsequent to his acquittal vide the impugned judgment, Appellant filed a petition under Sec. 452 Cr.P.C. in the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, Ganjam for release of the seized silver bar and ornaments so siezed vide seizure list dt.19.03.2007 from the Appellant, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 01 of 2013.
4.2. It is contended that learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, Ganjam vide order dtd.08.12.2017 while disposing the misc. Case, observed that since learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Aska, Ganjam while acquitting the Appellant vide his judgment dtd.22.11.2011 in S.T. Case No. 20 of 2010 (P.F.), has directed for confiscation of the stolen article to the State, the Court is not competent to pass any order for release of the seized articles in favour of the Appellant. Direction contained in Para 8 of the order dtd.08.12.2017 reads as follows:-
"8. Since property disposal order has already been passed by the then Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Aska vide his judgment dt.22.11.2011 in S.T. 20(PF)/2010 directing confiscation of the seized property to the State Govt. and the said Court was later on converted to permanent Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska (the present Court) and both the Courts being of concurrent jurisdiction, the present Misc. Case and the petition as aforesaid by Simanchal Nayak could not have been filed before this Court as any order passed on thsoe petitions, would amount to revision of own order which is not permissible under law. In view of my above discussions the petition U/s. 452 Cr.P.C. filed by P. Badri Prasad Patro @ Rap and the petition filed by Simanchal Nayak being devoid of any merit, stands dismissed."
7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submission made, this Court finds that after initiation of the proceeding in Aska P.S. Case No. 282 dtd.02.11.2006 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 404/2006 in the file of learned JMFC, Aska, the present Appellant on the ground that he has received the stolen property was arrested on 19.03.007 and the articles were seized from him vide seizure list dtd.19.03.2007. The Appellant was arrayed as an accused and faced the trial for the offence under Sec. 394/411 of the I.P.C..