Orissa Court January 2006 Judgments
Siris @ Srinibas Panda and Two ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(I)OLR259
S.B. Roy, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27.9.1995 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack in Sessions Trial No. 13/1995/2 of 1995 convicting the appellants under Section 302/34, IPC and sentencing each of them thereunder to suffer imprisonment for life.2. Learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned Government Advocate have taken us through the evidence on record. The prosecution case in brief is based on the testimony.of three eye witnesses namely, P.W.1 Rajkishore Panda, P.W.2 Rambha Dibya and P.W.3 Dinabandhu Panda and the evidence of P.W. 4 Dr. Dhirendranath Sarangi who held post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased. The alleged incident occurred at about 1 A.M. mid-night. The eye-witnesses version is that three appellants were armed with axe, bhujali and farsa and each of them inflicted one blow one after another on the head of deceased. Undoubtedly, the weapons allegedly used by the three appellants as per the ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Kiran Kumar Bedi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1381; 2006(I)OLR262
M.M. Das, J. 1. In Sessions Trial Case No.185 of 2002, the appellant-Kiran Kumar Bedi has been convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. for committing murder of the deceased Mahendra and Sumitra and under Section 307 I.P.C. for attempting to murder the injured Bhubaneswari. He has been sentenced with a punishment of death for the offence committed under Section 302 I.P.C. along with fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for six months and has been further sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for three months for the offence committed under Section 307 I.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Puri.2. The convict has also preferred JCRLA No.15 of 2004 from the prison challenging the conviction and sentence as stated above. The sentence of death having been passed against him, the matter has been referred to this Court under Section 366, Cr.P.C. in DSREF No.1 of 2004 for confirmation of the said sentence.3. One Bhramarlal Pu...
Tag this Judgment!The Servants of the People Society Represented Through Its President S ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Ori75; 101(2006)CLT318; 2006(I)OLR423
Sujit Barman Roy, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15.12.2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing W.P. (C) No. 14443 of 2005.2. The appellants filed the aforesaid writ petition before the learned Single Judge praying for stay of all further proceedings in C.S. (III) No. 173 of 2005 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar till disposal of I.C.C. No. 2855 of 2005 pending before the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar arising out of same cause of action.3. Appellant No. 1 being the Servants of the People Society is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960. Appellant No, 2 is the Secretary of appellant No. 1 and Executive Secretary of the Board of Management of Orissa Branch of the said society. Appellant No. 3 is the Printer and Publisher of an Oriya daily newspaper, namely, 'The Samaja' published from various towns of Orissa. Appellant No. 4 is the Editor (working) of th...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Chandra Padhi and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(I)OLR419
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. The petitioner Nos. 1 to 8 are small traders. Their case is that they carry on business of vegetable vending over a vacant land named as 'HATTA' situated over Plot No. 3085 pertaining to Khata No. 545 in Hinjilicut within the jurisdiction of Hinjilicut N.A.C. A notice was published in the Oriya daily 'The Anupam Bharat' on 3.2.2005 and notices dated 1.2.2005 were also issued to the petitioners individually, notifying them to vacate the aforementioned land by 5.00 P.M. of 3.2.2005, failing which, they would be evicted from the said land. The notices have been annexed to the writ application as Annexure-3 series and the publication of the said notice has been annexed as Annexure-4. The petitioner No. 9 appears to be a Registered Association, registered under the Societies Registration Act of which the petitioner Nos. 1 to 8 and others are the members.2. The petitioners claim that shop rooms of various sizes exist over the said land which are in possession of some of t...
Tag this Judgment!K. Debendra Dora and anr. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(I)OLR213
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.M1. The appellants assail the order dated 30.7.2004 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Aska in M.C. No.121 of 2004 (S.C. No. 22/2004) imposing a penalty of Rs.20,000.00 (twenty thousand) on them, in default to suffer civil imprisonment for six months each.2. The materials on record reveal that both the appellants were bailors/sureties for one K. Ashok Kumar Dora, accused in Sessions Case No.22 of 2004 pending before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Aska. As the said accused did not appear in Court after his release on bail, the Court below issued notice to the appellants calling upon them to produce the said accused in Court. After perusing the show-cause reply of the appellants, the Court below being not satisfied with that imposed the penalty on them as stated in the first paragraph above. Thereafter as the appellants did not pay the penalty, process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. was issued to them. The NBWA issued against the appellants having been executed t...
Tag this Judgment!Rupa Kumar Sahu and Two ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: 101(2006)CLT675; 2006(I)OLR250
Sujit Barman Roy, C.J. 1. Both the appeals at the instance of three appellants, namely, Rupa Kumar Sahu, Abdul Hanan Khan and Abdul Wahab Khan arising out of the same judgment dated 18.9.1987 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore in S.T. No. 51 of 1987 were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. All the three appellants were convicted under Section 395, IPC and each of them was sentenced to R.I. for eight years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for six months more.2. The appellants were prosecuted on the aforesaid charge under Seciton 395, IPC for committing dacoity of 35 quintals of aluminium wire from the godown of Basta Section Office of Orissa State Electricity Board. In this case in course of trial, in all twelve witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. P.Ws. 2, 3 and 4, namely, Bidyut Kumar Das, Piru Besra and Subash Chandra Barik respectively were the eye witnesses. The booty of the dacoity i.e. 35 quinta...
Tag this Judgment!Kusia @ Krushna Sahu and 11 ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(I)OLR260
Sujit Barman Roy, C.J.1. This appeal by twelve appellants named above is directed against the judgment dated 17.9.1988 passed by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack convicting appellants Kusia @ Krushna Sahu, Dharani Panda, Dibakar Panda, Rusia Sahu, Madhab Sahu and Subash Sahu, Chandra Sekhar Das @ Bhalu and Panu Sahu under Secs. 148, 379/149 and 324/149, IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo R.I. for one year and convicting appellants Manguli Pradhan, Kina Rout, Nimai Roul and Gopal Samal under Sees. 379/149 and 324/149, IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo R.I. for one year.2. Learned counsel for both sides have taken me through the evidence on record.3. After considering the evidence on record, I am satisfied that the conviction of the appellants was justified and therefore, it does not call for any interference therewith. Further, the alleged occurrence took place way back in 1985 and since then two decades' time has elapsed. This appeal was filed in thi...
Tag this Judgment!Srustidhar Ash Vs. Smt. Chinmayee Ash and Ten ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Ori138; 101(2006)CLT444
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. The appeal has come on the list as 'to be mentioned'. Heard further argument. The First Appeal is disposed of in the following manner.2. Plaintiff-appellant challenges to the judgment and decree passed by Learned Additional Sub-Judge, Balasore in O.S. No. 3/92 of 1979/72-1.3. Plaintiff instituted that suit for partition of the suit property. According to him, he and defendant Nos. 2, 3, & 4 and the father of the defendant No. 6 are the five sons of late Subal Chandra Ash. Defendant Nos. 7 to 10 are the four daughters of late Subal Chandra Ash. Defendant No. 1 is the widow of late Subal Chandra Ash and mother of the plaintiff and the defendants except defendant Nos. 5 & 6. Defendant No. 5 is the widow and defendant No. 6 is the son of late Aswini Ash, a deceased son of Subal. Plaintiff's case is that he was a minor by the date of execution of registered partition deed dated 24.12.1958 (Ext. A). He executed that document during such minor hood on good faith and having...
Tag this Judgment!Meghanada Sahoo and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-2006
Reported in: 101(2006)CLT451
A.S. Naidu, J.1. In all these Writ Petitions the petitioners pray to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Opp, Parties to release the paddy seized from them respectively by the Tahsildar, Lakhanpur, Opp. Party No. 3, vide seizure-list dated 21.2.2005, Annexure-2 in the respective Writ Petitions. As the facts and points of law involved are same, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners assert that they are farmers and they possess their own lands. In support of such statement they rely upon the identity cards issued by the Tahsildar, vide Annexure-1. With much difficulty they had grown paddy in their lands and after harvesting for selling the same at the best price petitioner Nos. 2 to 7 had been to their nearby village Singharpur, which is the village of Petitioner No. 1. While all the petitioners were negotiating to sell their paddy, Opp. Party No. 3 Tahsildar conducted a raid and seized their entire paddy, vide the seizure-lists respectively...
Tag this Judgment!Choudhury Niranjan Mohapatra Vs. Andhra Bank and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-2006
Reported in: (2006)IIILLJ836Ori
A.K. Samantaray, J.1. In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has assailed the order passed by the opposite parties in imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement in a Departmental proceeding and has come with the prayer for quashing the order of the disciplinary authority under Annexure-18 and order of the appellate authority under Annexure-20.2. It is necessary to set out in some detail the facts which gave rise to the departmental proceedings against the petitioner resulting in the order or his compulsory retirement from service. The petitioner was initially appointed as Rural Credit Officer in Andhra Bank which was latter on re-designated as Rural Development Officer in the Grade of JM-I and the petitioner while working as such at Dhone, he was transferred to Berhampur Regional Office vide order dated July 1, 1991. Pursuant to the said order of transfer the petitioner joined in the regional office, Berhampur on July 12, 1991...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »