Orissa Court September 2001 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.
Satyasai Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-21-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4574
P.C. Naik, J.1. In exercise of powers conferred on him, under Section 3(z) of the National Security Act, 1980, (in short, 'the Act') the District Magistrate, Kalahandi passed an order on 13-11-2000 that the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the detenu') be detained. Accordingly, he was taken into custody on 14-11-2000. Aggrieved therewith, the detenu has filed this writ petition challenging the order of detention and his continued detention under the Act.2. The facts giving rise to this writ petition may be briefly stated thus:In connection with Bhaganipatna Town P.C. Case No. 138 dated 17-10-2000 under Sections. 307/34, I.P.C. the detenu was taken into custody the same day and was forwarded to the Court on 18-10-2000. on the basis of a confidential report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Kalahandi, the District Magistrate, Kalahandi being of the opinion and on being satisfied that in order to maintain public order, it was necessary to detain the detenu, an order of det...
Smt. Dipali Chakrabarti and 2 ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-21-2001
Reported in: I(2002)DMC491
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing of the F.I.R. lodged by one Purnima Chakrabarti, registered as Brajarajnagar P.S. Case No. 5, dated 7.1.1999 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 36/ 1999, pending in the Court of the S.Q.J.M., Jharsuguda.2. The essential facts stated in the application are as follows : The marriage between Purnima Chakrabarti, the informant, and present petitioner No. 3, Partha Pratim Chakrabarti, was solemnized on 5.2.1998 at Gumadera within Belpahar P.S. At the time of her marriage, the petitioners allegedly demanded cash of Rs. 40,000/- and accordingly, the parents of the informant had given on two instalments, one on 25.1.1998 Rs 20,000/- and the balance Rs. 20,000/- on 27.1.1998. They had also given two VIP suitcases and other marriage presentations. Despite this, their relationship did not continue cordially and there was frequent bickering, misunderstanding and quarrel between the two spouses as a re...
Gobinda Chandra Kuanr and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-21-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ515; 2001(II)OLR458
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioners in this application Under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code had prayed for quashing the order dated 29.11.97 taking cognizance of offence alleged to have been committed Under Section 316 of the Penal Code.2. On the- basis of an F.I.R. dated 31.5.1996 Dhusuri P.S. Case No. 35 of 1996 was registered against the petitioners for the offences alleged to have committed Under Sections 451, 506. 323, 325, 316 of the Penal Code read with Section 34 of the said Code. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that on 27.5.96 in the night while the informant and his father-in-law were taking their dinner, the petitioners abused them, threatened to assault and as a matter of fact assaulted the father-in-law of the informant by fist blows and when the wife of the informant came to the spot' she was also assaulted by the petitioner No. 2 on her belly by means of a 'Chatu' for which wife of the informant became senseless. As she was pregnant at that time she was shifted t...
Hemaprava Ray Vs. Smt. Nayana Mohapatra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-21-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR545
B. Panigrahi, J.1. These two appeals which arise from two separate orders passed by the Second Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Cuttack, in Misc. Case No. 2/2001 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. and Misc. Case No. 3/2001 under Order 40, Rule 1, C.P.C. arising out of Title Suit No. 280 of 2000 have been heard and disposed of together by this common judgment.2. The appellant is the unsuccessful plaintiff. She has filed the suit for declaration of her title and for recovery of possession of the suit land from the defendant-respondents. It is stated in the plaint that three separate agreements were executed by respondent No. 4 Bijaya Kumar Rout in favour of respondents 1 to 3 for sale of different portions of the suit land. Respondents 1 to 3 filed three separate suits against respondent No. 4 and in the said suits, there was a compromise- within a month from the date of filing of such suits whereunder defendant No. 4 agreed to execute sale deeds within a month from the date ...
Bai Majhi Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR536
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Sessions Judge, Kalahandi- Nuapada at Bhawanipatna, in S.C. No. 64 of 1994 convicting the appellant Under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him thereunder to undergo imprisonment for life for having committed murder of one Raju Majhi, his own brother-in-law.2. The skeletal picture of the prosecution story as depicted in the judgment of the Court below is as follows : The appellant is the maternal uncle of the informant (P.W.I) Budha Majhi of village Arkhedi under Thuamul-Rampur Police Station, in the district of Kalahandi. On 17.7.1994 evening, the appellant had visited the house of the informant and at that time he was holding a Tangia, a bow and arrow. After taking his dinner, he slept on the verandah of the house. The deceased and his wife (P.W.2) also slept on the same verandah. In the midnight, P.W.2, the mother of the informant shouted saying that the deceased (informant's father) was killed ...
Birendranath Jha and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR522
B. Panigrahi, J.1. Conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khurda, in S.T. No. 58/25/316 of 1995/94 Under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code directing the appellants to undergo imprisonment for life have been assailed in this appeal.2. The prosecution story tersely stated in the judgment of the trial Court is as follows. :The appellants except appellant Bachu Singh, undisputedly were working as Security Guards in M/s. Orissa Lamp Ltd., while the appellant Bachu Singh was working as Security Supervisor of the industrial unit which is situated in the Industrial Estate. Khurda. In the night of occurrence while they were on duty, some miscreants entered into the premises of M/s. Orissa Lamps. The miscreants were chased by the security personnel and in the process of search it was noticed that an unidentified dead body was lying inside the premises. Therefore, the appellant Bachu Singh lodged a written report vide Ext.9 on 26.9.1993 before the...
Balabhadra Panda Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-19-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT733; 2002CriLJ57; 2001(II)OLR453
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the Criminal Proceeding pending against the petitioner in G. R. Case No. 19 of 1991(V) in the court of the Special Judge. (Vigilance), Berhampur.2. The gist of the prosecution case as revealed from the F.I.R. and also the final report, is that the petitioner was working as Sub-Collector, Malkangiri, as such he was also acting as Chairman of the regional Marketing Committee, Malkangiri. He had demanded and accepted illegal gratification of Rs. 2,000/-from Gurumurty Mohanty on 31-8-91 at about 11.20 a.m., while be was present in the official residence of Sub-Collector, Malkangiri to revalidate a cheque bearing No. 56104 for Rs. 15,000/- which was issued by him on 10-7-91 and dishonoured by Koraput Gramya Bank. While accepting illegal gratification, he was caught redhanded and the amount was recovered fromthe accused. It appears that since the petitioner had retired from service, ...
Nilamadhab Acharya Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-19-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT805
C.R. Pal, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 30-5-2001 passed by the learned J. M F. C., Balasore in G. R. Case No. 486/97 directing the petitioner under Section 319, Cr. P. C. to face trial along with the other co-accused.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows :--The informant Gadadhar Acharya lodged an information at Remuna P. S. on 15-4-97 alleging that the father of the present petitioner who had prior enemity with the informant and his family members due to land dispute hit the heifer of the petitioner by means of a lathi and caused fracture of a hind leg ofthe heifer when it entered into the threshing floor of the petitioner which was not fenced. Seeing it when the informant protested the father of the petitioner abused him in filthy language and threatened him to kill. On the above information Remuna P. S. Case No. 56/97 was registered for the offences under Sections 294, 429, 506, I. P. C. After investigation police submitted charge sheet against the fat...
Mamata Mohanty Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-19-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT791
R.K. Patra, J.1. The petitioner is the widow of one Debakalyan Mohanty who was at the relevant time working as Senior Class-I Mining Engineer in Gevra Colliery Project in the State of Madhya Pradesh under the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (in brief 'S. E. C. L.'). In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, she prays for a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as 'the C B I.') to investigate the circumstances in which her husband-Debakalyan Mohanty was found dead on 30-12-1995 at Gevra, She suspects that her husband was murdered at the instance of hight officials of the S. E. C. L. because of his opposition to them for commission of different kinds of corruption in the Colliery and the so-called investigation made by the police of Bilaspur (of erstwhile Madhya Pradesh), is not fair, perfunctory and tainted.2. The case of the petitioner is that her husband-Debakalyan Mohanty first joined as Junior Executive Trainee Engineer at ...
Gobinda Chandra Sahoo and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-19-2001
Reported in: I(2002)DMC421
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. The three accused persons in G.R. Case No. 4097 of 1994 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar have filed this application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') with the prayer to quash the order of cognizance because of an amicable settlement of dispute between the parties outside the Court.2. It is the undisputed fact that petitioner No. 3 is the husband of the informant and petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are respectively the father and brother of petitioner No. 3. On 11.12.1994 the informant/opposite party No. 2 lodged the F.I.R. Annexure 2 alleging ill-treatment and cruelty on her by the said accused persons for non-fulfilment of the demand for dowry and also relating to the attempt made to kill her. She also stated in the F.I.R. regarding previous conciliation on the intervention of the gentlemen but in site of assurance of good behaviour continuance of the ill-treatment and attempt to murder. After a prolonged investigation, which a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »