Orissa Court July 1995 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.
Md. Abdul Zahur Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR312
D.P. Mohapatra, A.C.J. 1. In this writ application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner Md. Abdul Zahur who is brother of the detenu Tito alias Sayed Usman Alli has prayed for quashing the order passed by the Dist. Magistrate, Kendrapara on 15-12-1994 (Annexure-1) directing detention of the detenu under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act., 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the order passed by the State Govt. on 7-2-1995 (Annexure-4)confirming the detention order under Section 12(1) of the Act.The ground of detention dated 19-12-1994 (Annexure-2) shows that for the reasons and on the grounds stated therein the Dist. Magistrate was satisfied that, with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, the detenu should be detained under the Act. The main grounds of challenge against the detention order are that the order has been passed by the District Magistrate without due application of m...
Atanu Kumar Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR404
R.K. Dash, J.1. The petitioner and two others (since acquitted) faced trial under Sections 363 and 376 read with Section 34, IPC, in Sessions Trial No. 51/5 of 1990 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge. Sambalpur. Upon trial, the learned trial Court while acquitting two of the accused persons, convicted the petitioner under Sections 363 and 376, IPC and sentenced him to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment on each count. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Against his conviction and sentence, he preferred Criminal Appeal No 125/17 of 1990/91 and the Additional Sessions Judge on reappraisal on the evidence, concurred with the findings recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. It is against this Judgment and order that the present revision is filed.2. To put shortly, the prosecution case unfurled during trial is that on 23-4-1989 Pasala Kumari, a minor girl, while returning home from school with he friends, the petitione...
Ram Krushna Padhiary Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR419
A. Pasayat, J.1. Prayer of petitioner not to summon or examine witnesses named in the supplementary charge-sheet having been turned down by the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput, Jeypore in S.C. Nos. 273 and 274 of 1991, this revision application has been filed. The proceedings have a chequered cereer. At various stages this Court was approached on several occasions 2. A brief reference to factual aspects is necessary for disposal of the application. On the basis of FIR lodged at Jeypore Town P.S. two GR cases were instituted in relation to accusations punishable under Section 302 read with Section 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, IPC). After completion of investigation charge-sheets were submitted on 24-7-1991 against the petitioner and another. The cases were committed to the Court of Session. While the cases were pending, further investigation was undertaken and supplementary charge-sheets along with case diary were submitted by police. Summons were issued to the witnesses na...
Bichitrananda Behera Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR510
A. Pasayat, J. 1. In this appeal, judgment of conviction and sentence of the learned Special Judge, Cuttack relating to an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in short, 'the Act') is the subject-matter of challenge.2. Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows :The articles stored in the business premises of the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'accused') were checked, it was noticed that the quantity as reflected in the stock register maintained and in Board were at variance with the actual stock required to be maintained under the Orissa Declaration of Stocks and Prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1973 (in short, 'the Order'). Prosecution alleged that there was violation of the provisions of Clause 10 of the Orissa Baby Food Licensing Order, 1966 (in short, 'the Baby Food Order'), and condition No. 4 of the licence issued under Clause 5 of the aforesaid Order, in addition to violation of Clause 3(1) of the Order. A seizu...
Gouranga Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR228
R.K. Dash, J. 1. The accused, a grocer, was presented by the Food Inspector, Balangir, under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short, 'the Act'). Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, upon trial, found him guilty and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs. 600/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month. On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge upheld the conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has preferred the present revision challenging the judgments of both the Courts below.2. Prosecution case, briefly stated, is that the accused owns a retail grocery shop in village Sadaipali. Food Inspector, PW 1, visited his shop on 27-12-1989 at 9.30 a.m. and having suspected Besan and mustard oil displayed for sale for human Consumption to be adulterated, made statutory purchase of 600 gra...
Rabinarayan Khuntia Vs. Fakir Dalei and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR233
R.K. Dash, J. 1. This appeal by the plaintiff is against the reversing judgment of the learned District Judge, Puri, passed in Title Appeal No. 74 of 1976.2. Plaintiff's suit was for a declaration of title, recovery of possession and for injunction in respect of the suit land to an extent of Ac. 1. 82-1/2 dec., more specifically described in Schedule 'B' of the plaint. Plaintiff's case, in brief, was that the suit land belonged to one Lokanath Dalai who died issueless. His wife predeceased him. Defendants 3 to 5 as brother's and sister's sons of Lokanath succeeded to all his properties including the suit land and while being in possession, transferred the suit land to the plaintiff under the sale deed, Ext. 1. Defendant No. 1 advanced a false claim over the suit land alleging that he is the adopted son of Lokanath. It is asserted by the plaintiff that both Lokanath and his wife were illiterate and taking advantage of their illiteracy defendant No. 1 got some deeds of conveyance execute...
Govinda Chandra Senapati Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1014; 1995(II)OLR212
R.K. Patra, J. 1. By this application made under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Cantonment P. S. Case No86 of 1995 under Section 498A, 1PC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.1961.I have heard Sheri B. M. Patnaik. learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Advocate-Genera I for the State and Shri B.. H. Mohanty learned counsel appearing for the informant.2. The petitioner's son Vikram has married Lusna, the daughter of Bijayalaxmi Mohapatra on 28-6-1994. On the basis of FIR lodged by Bijayalaxmi the aforesaid Cantonment P. S. Case No. 86 of 1995 has come to be registered. As the petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with the aforesaid cast, it is relevant to note the contents of the related FIR lodged on 19-6-1995. The informant in the FIR has stated that her daughter Lusna was given in marriage to Vikram and after the marriage, there was demand of dowry in the shape of ...
Atish Behera and Two ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ270
A. Pasayat, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of conviction of three appellants (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused'), who faced trial for allegedly having committed an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'PC') on the accusation that they attempted to take away the life of informant who was the then Principal of Bhadrak College. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak found that the accused persons were guilty of offence punishable under Section 323, I.P.C, and sentenced each of them to rigorous imprisonment for three months, but extended the benefit of Prohibition of Offenders Act, 1958 (in short, the 'Probation Act') placing them under the probation of District Probation Officer for a period of two years on furnishing bonds of Rs. 2000/- each to keep peace and be of good behaviour.2. Prosecution version is unfolded during trial shows the sad state society is passing through. At this juncture it is t...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Raj Kishore Nayak and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-1995
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ452Ori
A. Pasayat, J.1. Two points are urged by New India Assurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'insurer') in support of this appeal under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (in short, the 'Act'). Firstly it is submitted that there is no material to show service of any intimation about the accident by Ramswarup Ram, owner of vehicle bearing registration No. WB-33-, 0386 (hereinafter referred to as 'owner'). Secondly, it is submitted that in view of clinching evidence that Hrushikesh Nayak (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') was 28 years of age at the time of death. Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum- Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Cuttack (in short, the 'Commissioner') should not have worked out entitlement of Respondents 1 to 4 (hereinafter referred to as 'claimants') at Rs. 86,764/-taking age of the deceased to be 25 years.2. Mr. P.C. Misra, learned counsel appearing for claimants submitted that plea relating to non-service was neither raised in the wr...
Mangala Khada and ors. Vs. Guru Adhari and After Him, Mukta Adhari and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-17-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR342
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. The point for decision is, whether a son living jointly with his father can avoid an ex parte decree for title and possession against his father on the ground that the property involved being ancestral property, the decree was not binding on him.2. Earlier Title Suit No. 43 of 1972 was filed by present defendant No. 1 against the father and uncles of the present plaintiffs who were defendants 2 to 4 in that suit. Though they filed joint written statement, yet thereafter, remained absent and ultimately an ex parte decree was passed. A misc. case under Order 9, Rule 13, CPC to set aside the ex parts decree was also dismissed for default. The matter was not thereafter taken up before any higher forum. The decree was executed and delivery of possession was given to the plaintiff in the suit in Execution Case No. 314 of 1974 of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Jeypore.Present plaintiff No. 1 (son of defendant No. 2 in the earlier suit) has come up with the present suit for...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »