Orissa Court July 1991 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.
Rafi UddIn Khan @ Rafik UddIn Khan Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-22-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ874; 1991(II)OLR255
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner challenges his conviction Under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC) and sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo R. I. for a further period of five months, as awarded by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge-cum -Additional Subordinate Judge, Puri and affirmed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Puri.2. Background facts as indicated by the prosecution are that on 17-6-1986 at about 9 p. m. taking, advantage of absence of inmates of the house of informant Baratun Bibr (PW 1), the petitioner committed rape 00 her. According to the informant at about 9 p. m. she went to the backyard to attend the call of nature and while returning, the petitioner suddenly caught hold of her from her backside and carried her to the verandah,, gagged her mouth and committed sexual intercourse with her forcibly. It is stated that the husband of the informant who had been to attend a feast came back and...
Subodh Sethi and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-22-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ3266
ORDERA. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioners assail their conviction Under Section 47, Clauses (a) and (f) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (in short 'the Act') and sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default R.I. for two months in respect of each of the offences. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. The conviction and sentence is awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baripada were upheld in appeal by the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada.2. The accusation leading to the prosecution is that on 2-11-1982, P.W. 3, the Sub-Inspector of Excise, Baripada (Mobile) while patrolling with his staff found that accused-petitioners distilling Illicit Distilled Liquor (in short I.D. Liquor) on the bank of Jambhira river. They found four drums each containing 40 Kgs. of molasses, mahua hot wash, four aluminium frying pans, four plastic pipes, one copper pipe and one kerosine tin used as receiver containing four litres of hot ...
Sanatan Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-22-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ352
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner assails the order dated 16-1-1991 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput, Jeypore, cancelling the bail granted by the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jeypore.2. It appears that the petitioner was released on bail by extending the privilege provided under proviso (a) to Sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code'). The petitioner was arrested for being in illegal possession of 9 Kgs. 600 gms.of Ganja. The petitioner was arrested and was remanded to custody on refusal of bail by the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, on 18-8-1990. Petitioner's bail application before the learned Sessions Judge was once turned down on 20-10-1990. Since no final form was received from the investigating agency, application for bail was moved on 22-10-1990 before the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, who taking note of proviso (a) to Sub-section (2) of Section 167 released the petitioner on bail....
Beleswar Debata and anr. Vs. Priyanath Mohanty and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ495; 1991(II)OLR200
B.L. Hansaria, C.J.1. The two petitioners challenged an order dated 16-2-1991 passed by .opp. party No. 1 which stated that their services shall not be required with effect from 20-3-1991. They approached this Court in O J. C. No. 1305 of 1991 and on 18-3-199! an order of status quo regarding cessation of the services of the petitioners was passed by a Bench of this Court consisting of Hon'ble Justice Rath and Hon'ble Justice Jaqadeb Roy. The case of the petitioners is that a xerox copy of the order along with a Setter of the advocate of the petitioners Shri Milan Kanungo was served on opp. party No. 1 on 19-3-1991. On 20-3-1991 petitioner No. 1 went to work in the morning and signed the Attendance Register. Petitioner No. 2 also similarly went to office at about 10 A. M. and signed the Attendance Register, At about 10-30 A. M. or 11 A. M., opp. party No. 2 questioned the petitioner as to why they had put their signatures in the Attendance Register in spite of their retrenchment. They ...
Shyama Sundar Sahu and anr. Vs. the State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: 1991(II)OLR243
A. Pasayat, J.1. The only point involved in this revision application is whether requirements of proviso to Sub-section (2) of Sec 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') were complied with.2. Main plank of argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that all witnesses named in the complaint petition were not examined and even the complainant himself who is the principal witness was not examined. According to him, such non-examination's vitiated the entire proceeding.3. Similar contentions were raised in Criminal Revision No. 656 of 1987 (Shankar Roul v. Rumakanta Swain and Anr.) disposed of on 1-7-1991 where I have dealt with similar submissions.4. 'All witnesses' means those whom the complainant chooses to examine. If any witness named in the complaint petition is not examined the complaient has to intimate the Court, that he does not want to examine the said witness. This view has been expressed by me in Shankar Routs case (supra), and in 1988 (I...
Bansidhar Tripathy (Dead) and After Him Mataji Dei @ Dibya and ors. Vs ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: 1991(II)OLR283
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioners assail correctness of the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur in a proceeding Under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the. Code).2. Background facts are that on the basis of a report of the Officer- in-charge of Barchana Police Station that the original petitioner in this revision application was creating disturbance in the possession of opposite party herein, a proceeding Under Section 144 of the Code was initiated by the, learned Executive Magistrate, Jaipur. Therein the present opposite party and one Bansidhar Tripathy (since dead) was arrayed as second party. By preliminary order dated 25-10-1979 said Banshidhar Tripathy was restrained from interfering in the disputed land. Subsequently the proceeding was converted to one Under Section 145 of the Code and both parties were called upon to file their written statements and examine witnesses. Learned Executive Magistrate passed final order on 26-9-1983...
Rasananda Bindhani and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ121
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioners assail their conviction and sentence as awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, first class, Baripada and affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Baripada.2. Prosecution case is that on 12-9-1982 a first information-report was lodged by the Electrical Sectional Officer, Construction, Betnoti alleging that in the night between 11-9-1982 and 12-9-1982 Low tension conductors of 12 spans had been stolen from Sarbana sub-station. During investigation and acting on some information, houses of the present petitioners were searched and some cut wires, aluminium articles and semi-finished aluminium products were seized. The seized aluminium wires were sent to the S.D.O., Electrical for opinion as to whether they are low tension conductors used by the Orissa State Electrical Board. The answer was in the affirmative. Therefore, the two petitioners and another Rabindra Kumar Patil (since acquitted) were sent for trial for offences punishable under Sections 379 and ...
Dinabandhu Das and ors. Vs. Batakrushna Das and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ3273
ORDERA. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioners assail correctness of the order passed by learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kendrapara (in short 'S.D.J.M.') in I.C.C. No. 75 of 1987 in taking cognizance Under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short I.P.C.') against them.2. Factual antecedents in short are that on 13-2-1987 one Srikanta Kumar Das, son of present opposite party No. 1, submitted a written report in Nikirai Police Out-Post to the effect that at about 9 a.m. that day while his father was returning after taking bath, he was assaulted by some of the present petitioners and when his mother ran to the place of occurrence she was also assaulted. Allegations of brick batting and pelting of stones during the course of incident were also made. Alleging inaction by the police, he filed a complaint petition on 13-3-1987 in the court of the S.D.J.M., Kendrapara, which was registered as I.C.C. No. 75/87. An inquiry was undertaken Under Section 202, Code of Criminal Procedure, ...
Smt. Ahalya Bariha Alias Barihani Vs. Chhelia Padhan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ493
ORDERA. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner assails correctness of order passed by the learned Additional SessiJudge, Bargarh, holding that the petitioner had failed to establish that she was entitled to any monthly allowance, for an illegitimate child, from the opposite party. The learned Subordinate Judge and Judicial Magistrate, first class, Padampur, had granted such allowance, which was reversed in revision by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.2. Petitioner claimed Rs. 50/- per month from the opposite party on the ground that latter was father of her illegitimate child, which was born out of illicit sexual relationship between them. Petitioner examined four witnesses to further her case, while opposite party examined five. Two documents were exhibited by petitioner purporting to show that the village committee had accepted the relationship between the parties, and the birth of the child was from their illicit sexual relations. The trial court accepted the prayer. The learned Additional S...
Orissa State Electricity Board Vs. Usharani Parida and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ944
S.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, by the owner of the vehicle. There is no cross-objection.2. Undisputedly, the truck No. ORL 418 belongs to the appellant. Case of the claimants is that on 5.10.1984 at 2 a.m. in the night, statue of Goddess Durga, a Hindu deity, was being carried in the truck for immersion in Badanadi of Aska. Deceased who is an employee of the appellant along with others was following the truck. At that time, the truck had to be moved back to negotiate a turning. Deceased who was behind the truck was hit by it and sustained fatal injuries. Claimants who are widow and four minor children of the deceased aged 40 years at the time of death, have claimed compensation of Rs. 1,30,000/-.3. Appellant contested the claim alleging that there was no rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver and the claim amount is excessive.4. Appreciating evidence of both the parties Tribunal has found that accident was on a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »