Biju @ Biraja Prasad Parida and Two ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....appeal shall lie. even otherwise, the word judgment as defined under section 2(9) means a statement given by a judge on the grounds of a decree or order. thus the contention that against an order passed by a single judge in an appeal filed under section 104 c.p.c., a further appeal lies to a division bench cannot be accepted. the newly incorporated section 100a in clear and specific terms prohibits further appeal against the decree and judgment or order of a single judge to a division bench notwithstanding anything contained in the letters patent. the letters patent which provides for further appeal to a division bench remains intact, but the right to prefer a further appeal is taken away even in respect of the matters arising under the special enactments or other instruments having the force of law be it against original/appellate decree or order heard and decided by a single judge. it has to be kept in mind that the special statute only provide for an appeal to the high court. it has not made any provision for filing appeal to a division bench against the judgment or decree or order of a single judge. no letters patent appeal shall lie against a judgment/order passed by a..........2008, pending in the court of the learned s.d.j.m. jajpur.3. from the pleadings in the case, it appears that an f.i.r. was lodged on 8.7.2008 under sections 452, 294, 354, 323, 506/34 i.p.c. and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed under sections 452, 294, 354, 323, 379, 506/34 i.p.c.4. learned counsel for the petitioners states that all the offences apart from the offence under section 294 i.p.c. are compoundable in nature and the informant who has entered appearance through mr. jena has filed an affidavit indicating that the matter has been amicably settled between themselves and although the written report was filed by her, she does not want to proceed with the case and seeks withdrawal of the g.r. case registered against the petitioners.5. considering the nature of the allegations made in the f.i.r. and the averments made in the affidavit sworn by the informant herself, in my considered opinion the chance of conviction in the case is bleak and the ends of justice would be best served if the criminal proceeding is quashed.6. accordingly, the crlmc is allowed and the criminal proceeding in g.r. case no. 422 of 2008, pending before the learned s.d.j.m.,.....

Judgment:

ORDER

I. Mohanty, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. A.K. Jena, learned Counsel for Opp. Party No. 2 and the learned State counsel for the State.

2. A prayer has been made in this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceeding initiated under Bari-Ramachandrapur P.S. Case No. 35 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 422 of 2008, pending in the court of the learned S.D.J.M. Jajpur.

3. From the pleadings in the case, it appears that an F.I.R. was lodged on 8.7.2008 under Sections 452, 294, 354, 323, 506/34 I.P.C. and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed under sections 452, 294, 354, 323, 379, 506/34 I.P.C.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners states that all the offences apart from the offence under Section 294 I.P.C. are compoundable in nature and the informant who has entered appearance through Mr. Jena has filed an affidavit indicating that the matter has been amicably settled between themselves and although the written report was filed by her, she does not want to proceed with the case and seeks withdrawal of the G.R. Case registered against the petitioners.

5. Considering the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the averments made in the affidavit sworn by the informant herself, in my considered opinion the chance of conviction in the case is bleak and the ends of justice would be best served if the criminal proceeding is quashed.

6. Accordingly, the CRLMC is allowed and the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No. 422 of 2008, pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur is quashed.

7. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.