Court : Orissa
Reported in : 93(2002)CLT550
p.k. patra, j. 1. this is an appeal against the judgment dated 15.12.90 passed by shri b. k. patnaik, second additional sessions judge, puri in sessions trial no. 41/267 of 1989 convicting the thirteen appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused persons') under sections 302/149/148/326 of the indian penal code (hereinafter referred to as 'ipc') and under section 9-b of the indian explosive act and sentencing accused persons nos. 1 and 2 to undergo imprisonment for life under section 302 ipc and the other eleven accused persons to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under section 302/149 ipc. all the aforesaid thirteen accused persons have also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence under section 148 ipc; accused persons nos. 4, 7, 9, 11 and 12 have further been convicted under section 326 ipc and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years; and accused persons nos. 1, 2 and 11 have also been convicted under section 9-b of the indian explosive act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. the substantive sentences of imprisonment have been directed to run concurrently.other ten accused persons in the trial have been acquitted of the charge.2. the facts leading to this appeal are as follows :on 27.2.1989 at about 10 a.m. when the informant (p.w. 1), his father (deceased) and other members of their party were going to catch fish in a rivulet known as 'baruna jora', the accused persons .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2002CriLJ871; 2002(I)OLR344
a.s. naidu, j.1. the accused-appellants have been held guilty of the offences punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the indian penal code, for committing murder of krupa gochhi by assaulting and firing gun shots. the trial court sentenced the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. being aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence, passed by the learned sessions judge, puri in sessions trial no. 297 of 1993, the appellants have filed this appeal.2. the f.i.r. was lodged by krushna chandra mohanty - p.w.4. the case of the prosecution is that on the fateful day of 15th september, 1989 at about 3.00 p.m., p.w.4,and the deceased, ' who were close friends, started from their respective houses and proceeded to kantilo. the deceased carried his pant and shirt in a bag on the plea that if he would wear the same, his opponents would come to know that he was going out: of the village and might assault him. he instructed p.w.4 to .proceed ahead of him via teli sahi and to wait for him. he intended to proceed through gokha sahi. according to their understanding, p.w.4 proceeded to kantilo via village ragadipada. near village padmabati, the deceased came and met him near the culvert, and both of them proceeded towards kantilo. the son-in-law of dandu mallik, who was catching fish sitting on the culvert and akal jena of their village who was drying the grains saw them. a query being made, they were informed that both of the them were going to kantilo .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2002(I)OLR208
b.p. das, j.1. the appellant having been convicted for commission of offences under section 302 as well as 307 of the penal code by the learned additional sessions judge, rourkela, has preferred this appeal. the appellant and two other accused persons, namely, lanka jhara and sanka jhara, had been charged under section 302/34 of the penal code for committing murder of deceased budhu jhara and they were also further charged under section 307/34 of the penal code for attempting to commit murder of sukutu jhara (p.w.8). the learned additional sessions judge on consideration of the evidence on record, convicted the appellant under section 302 of the penal code for committing the murder of budhu jhara and sentenced him to imprisonment for life, and also convicted the appellant under section 307 of the penal code for attempting to commit the murder of sukutu jhara and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years, with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently.2. the case of the prosecution is that some days prior to the date of occurrence a relation of the deceased and the injured, namely, kendu jhara (p.w.9) had come to their house and suspecting that the said kendu jhara had some illicit affairs with the sister of the accused persons, named rukha jhara, the accused persons had quarrelled with and assaulted kendu jhara and sukutu jhara. on the date of occurrence also some time before the occurrence there was exchange of blows between the appellant and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2001(II)OLR386
b. panigrahi, j.1. this appeal assails the judgment/ order passed by the learned sessions judge, mayurbhanj, baripada, in s.t. case no. 55 of 1993, whereby the appellant was convicted under sections 302 and 201, i.p.c. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under section 302, i.p.c. no separate sentence was awarded under section 201, i.p.c.2. the scenario of the prosecution case as revealed during course of trial is as follows :on 4.12.1992, the appellant along with two other associates took a video set. generator, cassettes from premsankar mishra of village jharadihi on hire with undertaking to return those articles on the next following day. those articles had been carried by operator diku majhi, who went along with the appellant and his two other associates. but on the following day neither diku majhi returned, nor the equipments were returned. suspecting that a mischievous game might have been played by the appellant and his associates, premsankar and his nephew rajesh kumar mishra moved from village to village on a motor bike in search of diku majhi, operator, and their video equipments. when the search was on, they learnt that the appellant was working as a servant in the house of one jagannath mishra of village asingi. one person called panda of village begunadihi took them to village asingi, where they found the appellant present. they brought the appellant to village kuali and then to village jhardihi. at jhardihi, it is said that the appellant .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2001CriLJ3739; 2001(II)OLR195
m. papanna, j.1. this is an application for an anticipatory bail moved by the petitioners before this court for invoking its jurisdiction under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure.2. facts of the case relevant for the purpose of its adjudication are delineated concisely hereunder :3. at bhubaneswar there is an institute known as xavier institute of management (in short, 'the institute'). it is a centre for development research and training (in short, the 'cenderet). one miss. bharati ray (in short, 'the victim') happens to be a senior programme manager of the institute. petitioner no. 1, d. n. rao (in short, 'mr. rao') acts as a co-ordinator of the institute. petitioner no. 2 mrs. swapna harison is his secreta'ry whereas petitioner no. 3, dr. latha rabinderan is the professor of the said institute. the victim alleges a series of incidents of sexual harassment and misbehaviour meted out to her by mr. rao, he addresses her always openly as well as in official discussions as 'you are just like use and throw pen, rotten apple and rotten fish'. he, in a discussion, accused her once, saying that when she was proceeding on leave she was spending time with director and keeping illicit relationship. on many occasions he directed her to stay in the office beyond office hours and also come to office on holidays. on protest, he directed her to go to distant places like koraput or malkangiri even if there was no need to go there and particularly when other male colleagues in the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2002Ori101; 92(2001)CLT414
p.k. misra, j.1. this civil revision is directed against the reversing order passed by the addl. district judge, bolangir, directing grant of succession certificate in favour of opposite party no. 1. opposite party no. 1 filed application under section 317 of the indian succession act before the subordinate judge, bolangir, for grant of succession certificate on the basis of a will allegedly executed by braja bihari bohidar. there is no dispute that the aforesaid braja bihari bohidar was a bachelor. opposite party no. 1 is a nephew of braja bihari, being son of one brother. the petitioners who were arrayed as opposite parties are respectively the widow and two sons of deceased's brother and the brother of braja bihari. there is no dispute that braja bihari died on 2-9-1987. opposite party no. 1 claims that braja bihari had executed the will on 4-5-1979 and bequeathed all his property in favour of opposite party no. 1. the present petitioners have tiled objection denying the execution of the will by the deceased. it was also pleaded that the will had been obtained by exercise of undue influence and had not been duly attested by the attesting witnesses.2. the subordinate judge rejected the application for grant of succession certificate on the ground that due execution of the will including the due attestation had not been proved and many suspicious circumstances had not been explained. the present opposite party no. 1 filed appeal which has been allowed by the appellate .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2001CriLJ793
order1. the appellants have challenged the judgment dated 28-2-1994 in s.t.no.21/156of 1993 passed by shri s.c. chhatoi, additional sessions judge, balasore convicting the appellants under section 376(2)(g) of the indian penal code (for short 'ipc') and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.2. briefly stated, the prosecution case is as follows :in the night of 24-2-93 the prosecutrix (p.w. 4) had slept with her son, aged about 5 years, and a minor girl (p.w. 8), aged about 9 years, in her house in village juari under singla police station in the district of balasore. her husband, a fisherman by profession, had been to the sea for catching fish. it is alleged that at about 11.00 p.m. she got up hearing knocks at the door and aroused p.w. 8 and lighted the lamp and found that these two appellants forced their entry inside the room, breaking open the door and one of them caught hold of her son and the other threatened her with a knife and physically lifted her from the house and took her to the bank of the river situated at a distance of about 50 cubits from her house and committed rape on her. thereafter the other person also committed rape on her. p.w. 4 was left on the spot and the culprits who were identified to be the appellants in this case by p.w. 4 due to previous acquaintance, left the place leaving behind the knife on the spot, p.w. 4 returned to her house and called p.w. 8 who had concealed her presence inside a cow-shed out of fear .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2001Ori6; 91(2001)CLT166
b.p. das, j. 1. this miscellaneous appeal is directed against an order dated 10-8-2000 passed by the learned civil judge (senior division), balasore on an application filed under order 39, rule 6 of the code of civil procedure (herein after referred to as 'c. p. c.'), registered as misc. case no. 453 of 2000 arising out of money suit no 35 of 2000.2 the brief fact leading to this appeal as stated by the learned counsel for the appellant was that an application under order 38. rule 5. c. p. c. was filed by the present respondent who as plaintiff filed a suit in the court below for recovery of an amount of rs. 6,50,000/- from the present appellant who was the defendant in the said suit. according to the appellant the order of conditional attachment passed by the learned civil judge is illegal and contrary to the provisions of order 38, rule 5, sub-rule (4), c. p. c..3. the case of the plaintiff-respondent, is that in pursuance of an agreement dated 17-12-1997 the defendant-appellant took a loan of rs. 5,00,000/- from her promising to repay the same within two years. further it was agreed that in the event the defendant-appellant would fail to repay the money within two years in terms of the agreement, the respondent would attach the trawler by the process of law, and at the same time the appellant also agreed to supply all the spoils from the sea to the respondent and the respondent would also be entitled to take 10% commission from the total sale amount of the fish. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2000(II)OLR521
p.k. misra, j.1. heard mr. s.k. misra for the petitioners, learned additional government advocate for opposite parties 1 to 3, mr. h.s. misra for opposite party no. 5 and mr. a.r. dash for opposite party no. 4.2. the dispute in the writ application relates to a ferry ghat which adjoins chadeipank grama panchayat on one side and binika notified area council on the other side of river mahanadi. it is apparent from annexure-1 that it was decided to put the ferry ghat to auction for the year 2000-2001 in accordance with rule 87 of the orissa grama panchayat rules, 1968 (in short, the 'rules')- it may be noticed that for previous two to three years also the ferry ghat had been put to auction. as per annexure-1, the auction was scheduled to be held by the block development officer (in short, the 'b.d.o.'), the prescribed authority to hold the auction as contemplated in rule 87 (d) of the rules, on 28.3.2000 at 11.00 a.m. and accordingly the notice dated 10.3.2000 (annexure-2) was duly issued. while the matter stood thus, by a subsequent notice dated 25.3.2000 (annexure-3), the b.d.o. issued a notice to the general public stating that the auction cannot be hold on 28.3.2000 due to 'some unavoidable reasons'. however, in the said annexure-3, reason for not holding the auction had not been indicated. it appears that subsequently, the collector has given a direction that the ferry ghat in question should be settled with present opposite party no. 5. the action of the b.d.o. in not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2001Ori1; 2000(II)OLR367
a. k. patra, j. 1. this letters patentappeal filed by the defendant is directed against the decision of the learned single judge in first appeal no. 172 of 1982 by which the decree of eviction has been confirmed. 2. the respondent filed the suit for eviction of the appellant from the suit tank and damages for illegal occupation thereof. its case is that the suit tank is known as 'aga pokhari' and was a part of the estate of the raja manmathnath deo, an intermediary. it was recorded as his anabadi khata. the suit tank case to be vested in the state of orissa free from all encumbrances under the orissa estates abolition act. since the tank was maintained and managed by the respondent, it automatically vested in it under the provisions of the orissa municipal act, 1950. it has been leasing out the right of pisciculture in the tank since 1953 with specific condition that the water of the tank should not be polluted. the appellant took lease for pisciculture in 1956 beginning from 16-3-1956 on annual rental basis. although the lease expired on 31-3-1973, he did not hand over possession. accordingly, the respondent served notice on him on 4-4-1973. instead of delivering possession, he filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondent. the said matter came to this court in second appeal no. 287 of 1977. this court on 8-1-1979 reversing the decrees of both the courts decreed the suit making it clear that the respondent would not interfere with his possession without .....
Tag this Judgment!