Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2008Ori71; 2008(I)OLR916
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed in public interest by one Hemanta Rath, who describes himself to be a Social Activist and also claims to function as the President of Deaf and Dumb Society in the district of Khurda.2. In this petition a complaint is made that the State of Orissa is not implementing the provisions of Pre-conception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (hereinafter called 'PNDT Act') even though the said Act was brought into existence in 1996 and was amended in order to make its provisions more effective by the Amendment Act 14 of 2003. The said amendment has come into existence with effect from 14-2-2003.3. The said Public Interest Litigation was filed noticing series of news items in the newspapers and in the electronic media to the effect that there have been recovery of hundreds of skeletons, skulls, body parts of children from different parts of the State. The petitioner asserts that recovery of such huge ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1973Ori244; 1976CriLJ405
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. By order of the Full Court to initiate a proceeding for contempt, the Registrar of the High Court issued the contempt notice dated 3-7-1972 (here-inafter to be referred to as the Notice) to Shri Baradakanta Misra, the alleged contem-ner (hereinafter to be referred to as the contemner) calling upon him to appear in person and to show cause on 3-8-1972 as to why be shall not be punished or any other appropriate order not be passed against him for contempt of the High Court. On 26-7-1972 the contemner filed a petition by way of preliminary reply. On 7-8-1972 be filed his show-cause application. The contemrer filed Criminal Appeal No. 174/72 before the Supreme Court to quash the notice. Therein he made the State of Orissa a party through its Chief Secretary. The Legal Re-membrancer-cum-the ex-officio Additional Secretary, Law Department, filed an affidavit (Annexure-1) before the Supreme Court on behalf of the State giving detailed history with reference to the averment...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1950Ori67
Ray, C.J.1. The four cases, mentioned above, arising out of as many petitions, were some of the pending cases in respect of which the jurisdiction of the Patna High Court ceased from the 26th July, under Orissa High Court Constitution Order. They have since been transferred to this Court, and heard analogously, as the points for decision are common to all and will be governed by this order.2. Criminal Misc. 2/48 has been filed by one Saradhakar Naik of Bamra State, seeking interference of this Court, in the matter of illegal arrest and detention of one Jaydev Thakur of Bamra State and to order him to be set at liberty.3. Similarly, Cr Misc. nOS. 3, 4 and 5 of 1948 arise out of petitions filed, respectively, by Jayadev Naik of Bamra, Rual Naik and Pravakar Das of Kalahandi, in relation to the arrests and detentions of Batnakar Patra of Bamra, Nilakanth Patnaik and Lingaraj Daa of Kalahandi. In all the petitions, the legality of arrests and detentions of the prisoners has been challenged...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2007CriLJ958; 2007(I)OLR109
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Both the aforesaid applications have been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of bail.2. The petitioner in BLAPL No. 4575 of 2006, namely, Bimal Kumar Khetan, was the husband of deceased Manisha while the petitioner in BLAPL No. 4185 of 2006 was the brother-in-law (husband's brother) of the said deceased. The aforesaid Bail Applications had earlier been disposed of by order of this Court dated 11.6.2006. Thereafter the informant moved the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 972 of 2006 arising out of SLP (Cri) No. 3745 of 2006. By judgment dated 18th September, 2006 the Supreme Court allowed the said appeal and directed this Court to reconsider the Bail Applications afresh in consonance with law and keeping in view the principles enumerated in the said judgment and has observed as follows:There is a need to indicate in the order, reasons for prima facie concluding why bail was being granted particularly where an accused was charge...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1997Ori172; 83(1997)CLT656; 1997(I)OLR497
D.M. Patnaik, J. 1. In both the writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court to quash the notification dated 3-8-1996 (Annexure 1 in O.J.C. No. 10495/96) of the Co-operation Department of the Government of Orissa amending the Orissa Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1958 (for short, the 'Rules') being arbitrary, unreasonable, against the public policy and ultra vires of the Orissa Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. The petitioner in O.J.C. No. 4064 of 1996 is a member of Sakhigopal Regulated Market Committee in the district of Puri and petitioner No. 1 in O.J.C. No. 10495 of 1996 is a life member of the Bahada Jhola Regulated Market Committee and petitioner No. 2 is an ex-member of the said market committee in the district of Nayagarh.Their case is, the above market committees have been constituted under the provisions of the Orissa Agricultura...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1993CriLJ442; 1992(II)OLR395
A. Pasayat, J.1. Even before the ink in certain judgments has become dry, divergence of view has surfaced and doubt regarding their correctness has arisen, relating to certain provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Though only one question was referred to the Full Bench for adjudication, members of the Bar pleaded that several other questions need a fresh look, and therefore, we have primarily considered the following questions :(1) Whether a Court of Session can, during transitional period as provided in Section 36-D of the Act take cognisance of an offence under the Act as a Court of original jurisdiction without the accused being committed to it for trial ?(2) Whether a remand beyond a period of fifteen days as indicated in Section 36-A(1)(b) is permissible ?(3) Whether the conditions in Section 37 of the Act relating to giant of bail override the effect of the proviso to Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Pro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1997CriLJ2396; 1997(I)OLR323
R.K. Dash, J.1. The petitioners (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused persons') by filing the present petition under Section 482, Cr PC have invoked the inherent power of the Court to quash the proceeding in 1 CC Mo. 142 of 1993 pending in the Court of the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar. The complainant, opposite party herein, filed the aforesaid complaint alleging inter alia that he being the owner of the premises comprising a shop room at C/58, Market Building, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, let out the same to the accused persons on 1-4-1987 on a monthly rent for a period of six years ending on 31-3-1993. On the expiry of the period though the tenancy automatically stood terminated, yet the complainant, in abundant caution, issued notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act calling upon the accused persons to give him vacant possession of the tenanted premises. Despite the said notice the accused persons continued to possess illegally, whereupon he issued ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2010(I)OLR963
Sunju Panda, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.8.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Balasore in Civil Suit No. 80 of 2007-I partly allowing an application for amendment and partly rejecting an application for incorporating paragraphs 2 to 6 of the proposed amendment filed by the petitioner.2. To appreciate the contentions of the parties, the following facts of the case are necessary to be stated.The petitioner as plaintiff filed C.S. No. 80 of 2007-I before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Balasore for declaration of right, title, interest, injunction and possession in respect of the suit schedule lands appertaining to Plot No. 873 measuring Ac.2.45 decimals and Plot No. 872 measuring Ac.0.06 decimals, in total Ac.2.47 decimals under Consolidation Khata No. 355/23 in Mouza-Silada. As per the settlement record, the said lands belonged to opposite party Nos. 5 to 6, who sold the same to the petitioner on payme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1970Ori43
Patra, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against a decision of a learned Judge of this Court in Second Appeal No. 407 of 1963. The parties in this litigation are residents of the ex-State area of Gangpur now comprised in the district of Sundergarh. One Udhaba Kar, who was separate from his brothers, died in the year 1938 leaving behind Sunakha-dika, the widow of his pre-deceased son Krupa, the two daughters of Krupa who are the plaintiffs, Bikram who was Krupa's only son and the disputed properties. Bikram died on 11-2-1945 and Sunakhadia died in the year 1953. Thereafter litigation started in respect of the disputed properties between the plaintiffs who claimed the entire property for themselves and the defendant who is the grandson of one of the separate brothers of Udhab. The claim of the plaintiffs is that on the death of Udhab his entire properties devolved on his grandson Bikram as the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937 (hereinafter referred to as the 1937 Act), whi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 93(2002)CLT156; [2002]127STC168(Orissa)
R.K. Patra, J. 1. Validity of Finance Department notification dated 20.7.1999 (Annexure-9) by which the State Government has withdrawn the Sales Tax exemption granted to the petitioner in the Finance Department notification dated 25.1.1999 (Annexure-8) is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.2. The petitioner's case is that it is a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. It has an authorised capital of Rs. 10 crores out of which the paid up capital is Rs. 8.50 crores. The Industrial Promotion and Investment Corporation of Orissa Limited (IPICOL) has an equity participation of Rs. 50 lakhs in the Company. Many investors have also invested money to the tune of Rs. 225 lakhs in the Company by purchasing shares. It is engaged in manufacture of Vanaspati which has a good market in the State of Orissa as well as outside the State. It is a foot selling consumer item but the competition being tough, the petitioner is not in a position to raise...
Tag this Judgment!