Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Prasant Kumar Singh Vs. State of Orissa

Prasant Kumar Singh vs State of Orissa

Type Court Judgment Court Orissa Decided Jun 19, 1998
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/535257

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Orissa High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl. Misc. Case No. 274 of 1998
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- LABOUR & SERVICES Pay Scale:[Tarun Chatterjee & R.M. Lodha,JJ] Fixation - Orissa Service Code (1939), Rule 74(b) Promotion - Government servant, by virtue of Rule 74(b), gets higher pay than what he was getting immediately before his promotion - Circular Dated 19.3.1983 modifying earlier Circular Dated 18.6.198...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 205

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Prasant Kumar Singh

Advocate Susanta Kumar Dash, ;S.K. Mishra, ;B. Mohapatra and ;S. Dash, Advs.

Respondent

State of Orissa

Advocate R.K. Patnaik, A.S.C.

Legal References

Reported In
1998CriLJ4762

Excerpt

- labour & services pay scale:[tarun chatterjee & r.m. lodha,jj] fixation - orissa service code (1939), rule 74(b) promotion - government servant, by virtue of rule 74(b), gets higher pay than what he was getting immediately before his promotion - circular dated 19.3.1983 modifying earlier circular dated 18.6.1982 resulting in reduction of pay of employee on promotion held, it is not legal. statutory rules cannot be altered or amended by such executive orders or circulars or instructions nor can they replace statutory rules. .....is agreed upon by both the parties that this matter may be disposed of at this stage of hearing on admission.3. petitioner is one of the accused persons in g.r. case no. 2 of 1997 of the court of s.d.j.m., banki. he prayed for representation under section 205 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (in short 'the code'). that petition was rejected on 6-1 -98 and the following order was passed,the record is put up today on the strength of advance petiton.advocate for r.n. prusty files power on behalf of the accused/absconder sri prasanta ku. singh and files a petition under section 205, cr.p.c. praying dispense with the personal appearance of the accused before this court on the ground stated therein. copy served on the a.p.p. the petition under section 205, cr.p.c. hence rejected.4. learned counsel for the petitioner states that grounds advanced in support of the prayer was not at all considered and the petition was rejected under section 205, cr.p.c. arbitrarily by a non-speaking order. his prayer is that learned magistrate, should consider the grounds advanced and pass a reasoned order. learned addl. standing counsel has no objection to that submission.5. from the abovequoted order it is apparent on the face of it that the application was summarily rejected without assigning any reason. such an attitude is neither proper nor desirable. hence the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned s.d.j.m., banki to hear afresh the petitioner under section 205, cr.p.c. and to dispose of the same in accordance with law and delivering a speaking order within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.6. learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to produce a certified/authenticated copy of this order before the s.d.j.m. by 6-7-1998. in that event learned s.d.j.m. shall fix a date for hearing of the petition under section 205, cr.p.c. and dispose of the same within a period of 15 days thereafter, free copy of this.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

P.K. Tripathi, J.

1. Heard.

2. It is agreed upon by both the parties that this matter may be disposed of at this stage of hearing on admission.

3. Petitioner is one of the accused persons in G.R. Case No. 2 of 1997 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Banki. He prayed for representation under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code'). That petition was rejected on 6-1 -98 and the following order was passed,

The record is put up today on the strength of advance petiton.

Advocate for R.N. Prusty files power on behalf of the accused/absconder Sri Prasanta Ku. Singh and files a petition under Section 205, Cr.P.C. praying dispense with the personal appearance of the accused before this Court on the ground stated therein. Copy served on the A.P.P. The petition under Section 205, Cr.P.C. hence rejected.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that grounds advanced in support of the prayer was not at all considered and the petition was rejected under Section 205, Cr.P.C. arbitrarily by a non-speaking order. His prayer is that learned Magistrate, should consider the grounds advanced and pass a reasoned order. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel has no objection to that submission.

5. From the abovequoted order it is apparent on the face of it that the application was summarily rejected without assigning any reason. Such an attitude is neither proper nor desirable. Hence the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned S.D.J.M., Banki to hear afresh the petitioner under Section 205, Cr.P.C. and to dispose of the same in accordance with law and delivering a speaking order within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner undertakes to produce a certified/authenticated copy of this order before the S.D.J.M. by 6-7-1998. In that event learned S.D.J.M. shall fix a date for hearing of the petition under Section 205, Cr.P.C. and dispose of the same within a period of 15 days thereafter, Free copy of this order be supplied to learned Addl. Standing Counsel so as to issue appropriate instruction to the State Counsel appearing in that Court.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial