Orissa Court March 2000 Judgments
Dhana Harijan Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-16-2000
Reported in: 89(2000)CLT554; 2000(I)OLR457
B.N. Agrawal, C.J.1. The sole appellant has been convicted by the trial Court under Section 302 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 9.3.1992 at about 10 P.M. when Jagannath Harijan, deceased and his wife Jamuna Harijan (P.W.3) were returning from the house of Jasoda Harijan (P.W.2) situate in village Mirganguda to their house in village Kojguda and on the way in the mango tope, the appellant and accused Bhagban Harijan suddenly appeared and Bhagban Harijan pushed wife of the deceased whereafter the aforesaid two accused persons including the appellant assaulted the deceased on his head by Tangia and thereafter both of them fled away with the same. Jasoda Harijan (P.W.2) came to the spot on hearing hulla of Jamuna Harijan and both of them removed the injured to Sub- Divisional Hospital for treatment. After her husband was admitted in the hospital, the wife of the deceased went to Nowrangpur Police Station an...
Tag this Judgment!Dambaru Gouda Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-16-2000
Reported in: 89(2000)CLT702; 2001CriLJ2993; 2000(I)OLR454
B.N. Agrawal, C.J.1. The sole appellant has been convicted by the trial Court under Section 3(2) (iii) and (iv) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 3(2)(iv) of the Act and rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 3(2)(iii) of the Act. The sentences however have been ordered to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case in short is that on 16.2.1992 at about 8 P.M. the appellant set the dwelling house of the informant Sadan Majhi (P.W. 1) and straw heap of his brother Deba Majhi (P.W.2) on fire situate in village Batakari within the police station Papadahandi under the district of Nowrangpur, as a result of which the said house and straw heap were destroyed and the fact that the aforesaid two witnesses belong to Scheduled Tribes was known to the appellant. It has been further stated that on hulla being raised, witnesses arrived, t...
Tag this Judgment!Khara Kamidi Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-16-2000
Reported in: 90(2000)CLT132; 2000CriLJ3558
B.N. Agrawal, C.J.1. The appellant has been convicted by the trial Court under Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years on each count. Further he has been convicted under Sections 452 and 342, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and six months respectively. The sentences, however, have been ordered to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 19-9-1993 at about 8.00 p.m. the appellant entered the house of the complainant being armed with a knife and dragged him outside by snatching hold of his hair and threatened to kill him if he shouted. The appellant forcibly took away his wife to his house, bolted the door from inside and committed rape upon her. After commission of rape, the appellant is said to have threatened the victim not to disclose the matter to others failing which she will be killed. The matter was reported by the victim...
Tag this Judgment!Manguli Muduli and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4176
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. The alleged kidnapper turned husband and the alleged associates-abetters of the offence of kidnapping have approached this Court in this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C., to quash the order of cognizance taken under Sections 366/109, I.P.C. by the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate (Sadar), Cuttack, vide his order dated 10-8-1994 in G.R. Case No. 2143 of 1993.2. Usha (O.P. No. 2) is the girl who was allegedly kidnapped on 23-12-1993 as per the F.I.R. of her father Upendra (O.P. No. 3). It is alleged in the F.I.R. that by the date of occurrence she was I61/2 years old. It appears from order dated 24-6-1994 in the G.R. case that the date of birth of Usha as noted in the certificate granted by the Board of Secondary Education, Orissa, is May 29, 1977. Petitioner No. 2 after being arrested was allowed to go on bail as per order dated 26-4-1994 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Case No. 840 of 1994. Petitioner No. 1 was allowed to go on bail by this Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Ananta Naik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: 89(2000)CLT693; 2000(I)OLR477
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Accused in G.R. Case No. 1410 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar has filed the above Criminal Revision challenging the order passed by the S.D.J.M. on 9.8.1999 rejecting his prayer to grant the benefit of bail Under Section 167(2)(a), Cr. P.C. He has also filed the above noted Criminal Misc. Case Under Section 439, Cr. P.C. with the prayer for bail. Since both the applications were heard analogously and arising out of the same case, this common judgment shall abide the result in both the cases.2. It is alleged that the accused petitioner molested and tried to ravish a young girl, aged about 10 years taking advantage of his access to that house and also taking advantage of absence of any other inmates of that house. On the F.I.R. lodged by the mother of the victim girl, Nayapalli Police-station Case No. 97 of 1999 was registered for the offences punishable Under Sections 448 and 376/511, I.P.C. As it reveals from the L.C.R., the charge-sheet having been filed agai...
Tag this Judgment!Pratima Behera Vs. State of Orissa and 2 ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: 2000(I)OLR567
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C is disposed of at the stage of hearing on admission with active participation of both the parties.3. Petitioner is the informant in G.R. Case No. 18/99 pending in the Court of S.D.J.M.. Jagatsinghpur arising out of Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No. 1 3/99. The offences alleged are under Sections 302/34. I.P.C Petitioner filed an application in the Court of S.D.J.M.. to issue process against opp. party Nos. 2 and 3. Learned S.D.J.M. rejected that prayer vide the impugned order dt. 22.9.1999 on the ground that after taking cognizance of the offence and issuing process against the charge-sheeted accused persons he was functus officio to exercise further power to issue process to any other persons. He was also of the view that exercising such power is only available under Section 319. Cr.P.C. and that to by the trial Court.4. As rightly argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and correctly conceded by...
Tag this Judgment!Mangru Bhagat Vs. Bhawla Oram and 6 ors. and Bijli Bhagat
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1999; 2000(I)OLR541
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. This is a peculiar case of its own nature. The 1 st party in Criminal Misc. Case No. 728/92 of the Court of Executive Magistrate, Panposh has filed this revision against the reversing order dated 12.3.1996 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge,'Rourkela in Criminal Revision No. 23/94 against the final order under Section 145. Cr.P.C. of the Executive Magistrate declaring the possession of the 1st party vide order dt. 7.1 1.1994.3. It appears from the certified copy of the order dt. 7.11.1 994 that after perusal of the evidence on record, learned Executive Magistrate declared the possession of the 1st party on the basis of an ex pane decree he obtained in a civil suit and negatived the contention of the 2nd party since they failed to show that they were successful in setting aside the ex pane decree. The 2nd party members preferred the aforesaid Criminal Revision in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela. Though the whole fact and evidence was...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sumitra Dei and anr. Vs. Nalu Chhatoi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: 2000(I)OLR512
P.K. Misra, J.1. Wife has filed this appeal against a reversing decision.2. Plaintiff-respondent had filed the suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right. The said suit was resisted on the ground that the suit had been filed after much delay only to get over the order of the Magistrate under Section 125, Cr.P.C. directing payment of maintenance to the wife and minor daughter. It was also pleaded that the husband had treated the wife with cruelly and mental torture and as such, there was justification for the wife to live apart from the husband.3. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the suit had been filed belatedly without any justifiable reason and it was also found that the wife had been treated with cruelty and as such, there was reasonable cause for the wife to live apart from the husband. The aforesaid decision of the trial Court was reversed by the lower appellate Court which decreed the suit for restitution of conjugal righ...
Tag this Judgment!Malla Alias Madan Sethi Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3379; 2000(I)OLR439
B.P. Das, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner questions the legality and validity of the order of his detention Under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (in short, 'the Act').2. The aforesaid order of detention is challenged on various grounds including the ground that the incidents affecting ordinary breach of law and order have been taken as the basis for detention of the petitioner as a security prisoner with the sole object of frustrating his release on bail. Another ground taken is that the representation of the petitioner has not been considered expeditiously and ultimately the same was rejected after the two and half months which is violative of the mandate of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and, therefore, the impugned order of detention is liable to be quashed.3. The State of Orissa as well as the detaining authority, i.e., the District Magistrate, Ganjam, has filed their counter affidavits in support of the order of detention and has taken a sta...
Tag this Judgment!Swarup Kumar Sundara Vs. State of Orissa and Two ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: 2000(I)OLR482
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. In this revision application petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order dated 16.1.1995 and consequently the order dated 5.9.1 994, passed by learned Executive Magistrate, Ranpur in Criminal Misc. Case No. 9 of 1994, a proceeding which is presently continuing under Section 145, Cr.P.C. The 2nd party No. 2 is the petitioner and the first party 2nd party No. 1 are respectively the opposite parties 2 and 3 in this revision.2. A brief narration of the fact will clarify the position to appreciate the contentions of the parties.On the basis of an application filed under Section 144, Cr.P.C, on 6.7.1994, learned Executive Magistrate initiated the proceeding and issued prohibitory order restraining the 2nd party members. After appearance of the 2nd party members on 1.9.1994 the first party prayed to convert the proceeding to one under Section 145, Cr.P.C to adjudicate the disputed claim of possession asserted by the parties. On 5.9.1994, he passed order...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »