Orissa Court January 1970 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Anam Padhan Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ229
ORDERR.N. Misra, J. 1. This is a reference made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Puri, recommending the quashing of the order dated 15-9-67 in a pending G. R. case on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khurda. By the impugned order the learned Magistrate directed,'The C. S. I. applies that one Anam Padhan who has been named in the F. I. R. and by the witnesses before the police, but has not been charge-sheeted be summoned. Summon this accused to next date.'2. Two contentions were raised before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. They are:--(1) The order of the Magistrate directing the police to submit charge-sheet upon a final report is contrary to law and without jurisdiction; so the subsequent orders passed including the order directing the petitioner to appear as an accused are illegal and liable to be set aside. (2) The learned S. D. M. while directing issue of summons to the petitioner to appear as an accused has not applied his mind and as such the order is il...
Dr. Srinibas Sunder Das Vs. Land Acquisition Collector and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Ori197
A. Misra, J. 1. This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution to issue a writ of Mandamus or other suitable direction to Opp. party No. 1 to refer the application dated 24-8-65 filed by petitioner Under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to the District Judge, Ganjam for disposal according to law.2. The facts, in brief, are that the Land Acquisition Officer (opp. party No. 1) acquired certain lands in Berhampur in the year 1964 including S. No. 189/B-2. Petitioner coming to learn about this acquisition filed objections by his letter at Annexure B and was called upon to prefer his claim. Accordingly, he filed his claim in respect of 0.14 cents alleging that the said extent of the acquired land in Plot No. 139/B-2 belonged to him. Opposite party No. 1 issued a notice to him on 27-3-65 intimating that the award would be pronounced at Chatrapur on 30-3-65 at 11.00 a. m. Petitioner received this notice at Jharsuguda where he was serving on 30-3-65, and as s...
Kuber Padhan Vs. Chaturbhuja Kuar and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-1970
Reported in: 1970CriLJ1543
ORDERB.N. Misra, J.1. This reference has been made by the learned Sessions Judge, Bolangir Kalahandi recommending the quashing of an order made by a learned Magistrate by which he dropped the proceeding under Section 145, Criminal P.C. without giving a positive finding that there was no further apprehension of the breach of the peace. The recommendation of the learned Sessions Judge is that the said order should be vacated and the learned Magistrate should be called upon to dispose of the proceeding in accordance with law.The learned Sessions Judge in his order of reference has referred to several cases. The impugned order of the learned Magistrate goes to show that he had already drawn up a preliminary order under Section 145, Criminal P. C. having been satisfied that there existed apprehension of the breach of the peace. An application was made on behalf of the second party to the effect that the said proceeding should be dropped on account of two facts, firstly that thorn was alread...
Bauli Panigrahi and anr. Vs. Hari Panigrahi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-1970
Reported in: 1970CriLJ1704
ORDERR.N. Misra, J.1. This is a revision against a judgment of conviction passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bhadrak. The two petitioners have been convicted under Section 379, I. P. C. and each of them has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25/- or to suffer S. I. for 5 days in default.2. Mr. Mohanty, appearing for the accused petitioners, contends that petitioners 1 and 2 are father and son respectively, and petitioner No. 2 is a young man aged about 20. The allegation is that the petitioners, on 31-10.66, entered into the bari of the opposite party and out five bamboos from a clump which was valued at Rs. 5/-. Admittedly the petitioners and the opposite party are close relations being agnates who are also cosharers in respect of certain properties including the land from which the bamboos are said to have been re-moved. P. W. 1 the complainant in his evidence has admitted the following position:The case land and other lands are jointly recorded in the names of Chintam...
Hadu Goudo and ors. Vs. Dayanidhi Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-13-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Ori196
R.N. Misra, J. 1. This is an appeal directed against the order dated 3-2-65 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Berhampur, directing recovery of possession of certain properlies which had been sold away by the ex-receiver in favour of the appellants without authority of the court.2. In T. S. No. 23 of 1943 there was a compromise in April 1951. The subject matter of the title suit related to vast immovable properties and a running business. Receivers were appointed to be in charge of the properties. Damodar Sahu, a member of the family, came to be appointed as a receiver. In February, 1959 Damodar appointed an authorised agent and in [July, 1959 there were a number of transfers under which properties which were the subject matter of the litigation and in respect of which receiver had been appointed were alienated in favour of a number of persons. In April, 1961 Damodar was discharged from receivership. , An application was made in the court of the learned Subordinate Judge purporti...
State Vs. Jagannath Swain
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-13-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ572
ORDER1. This Revision Application directed against the order dated 8.867 passed 'by the B. D.O. Magistrate, First Class, Sadar, Cuttack, granting anticipatory bail to the opposite party in G. R. Case No. 1313/1699 T/67 of 1967. The State of Orissa has filed this revision application on the allegation that there was no formal warrant of arrest issued against the opposite party. As such by merely appearing before the learned Magistrate the opposite party could not obtain an order for anticipatory bail.2. Mr. Rahenoma, appearing for the opposite party, contends that this application has become anfractuous inasmuch as the case in question has now been woodlouse. Mr. Ramdas, appearing for the State, however, wants me to decide the question as to whether anticipatory bail can be granted in law. There was no consensus of judicial opinion on this point. Majority of the High Courts, however, had supported the view that there Wa3 no provision for any anticipatory bail. Reference may be made to A...
Krishna Chandra Naik and ors. Vs. Sk. Makbul and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Ori209; 1970CriLJ1580
Ray, J.1. The Criminal Reference has been referred to a Division Bench by OUT learned brother R.N. Misra, J., for an authoritative decision on the question as to whether affidavits for utilisation in a proceeding under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code should be sworn before the Magistrate before whom the proceeding is pending, or another Magistrate as authorised by the trying Magistrate, and affidavits which are not sworn to before these authorities are not available to be looked into in such proceeding.In the proceeding tinder Section 145, out of which this reference arose, the parties swore some of their affidavits before the officer-in-charge of the current duties of the S. D. O. in whose Court the Section 145 proceeding was pending during the latter's absence and before another first class Magistrate who had no seisin over the proceeding. The S. D. O. relied upon these affidavits along with others in disposing of the case under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code before him. T...
General Manager, South Eastern Railway Vs. Iswarlal Purusottam and ors ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-06-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Ori194
R.N. Misra, J. 1. Defendant No. 1, being the Union of India represented by the General Manager of the South Eastern Railway, is the appellant against a reversing judgment of the learned District Judge of Bolangir in suit for recovery of Rs. 3640 representing the price of 364 bags of Mudhi which, according to the plaintiff, had been delivered to the Railway at Kantabanjhi Railway Station on 16-7-59 for the purposes of onward transmission to Nasik.2. By 1959 there was restriction on movement of Mudhi, a preparation from rice, out of the State of Orissa. The plaintiff-firm obtained necessary permit for exporting Mudhi out of the State of Orissa to the State of Maharashtra and indented two wagons for the purpose on 29-6-59. Two wagons being Nos. 69668 N. R. and 52789 C. R. were allotted to the plaintiff valid upto 16-7-59. The wagons were supplied at 5 p. m.on 16-7-59 at the relevant place for loading.864 bags were loaded in wagon No. 52789 and 316 in wagon No. 69668. This loading was comp...
Mandalapu Sundar Narayan and ors. Vs. V.V. Chenulu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-05-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Ori184; 1970CriLJ1378
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. Petitioner and opposite party belong to the same street in Jeypore town. Petitioner No. 2 is the mother and petitioner No. 3 is the wife of petitioner No. 1. Petitioner No. 7 is the father-in-law of Petitioner No. 1 and Petitioners 4 to 6 are the sons of petitioner No, 7. It is said that about 3.30 p. m. on 13-10-67 the son of petitioner No. 1 pushed a young Sindhi boy riding on a cycle as a result of which he fell down. This took place in hont of the house of the opposite party and the opposite party chided the son of petitioner No. 1. Petitioners 2 and 3 abused the opposite party in insulting language. At about 6.30 p. m. the opposite party was restrained and assaulted in the house of petitioner No. 1. The matter was reported at the police station, but no action was taken. The opposite party thereupon filed a complaint on 19-10-67 before the Magistrate, First Class, Jeypore, alleging commission of certain criminal offences and the same is pending. The inaction on ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›