Sanjay Behera @ Pintu vs State Of Odisha
2022 Latest Caselaw 1458 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                              CRLREV NO.528 OF 2019
            Sanjay Behera @ Pintu                 ....           Appellant
                                                          Mr.A.K. Sahoo,
                                                               Advocate

                                       -versus-
            State of Odisha                       ....        Respondents
                                                           Miss.S.Mishra,
                                                                    ASC

                      CORAM:
                      MR. JUSTICE D.DASH
                                       ORDER

21.02.2022 Order No. I.A. No.456 of 2021

10. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement (virtual/physical) mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

3. The Petitioner, by filing the Revision under section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act has questioned the legality and propriety of the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Phulbani in Criminal Appeal no.05 of 2016.

This Petitioner-CICL, by filing of the above noted Appeal, had assailed the judgment passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Phulbani in J.J. Case No.33 of 2013.

The Petitioner-CICL has been found to have committed the offence under section 376 of the IPC read with section 4 of POCSO

// 2 //

Act and accordingly an order has been passed that he be kept in place of safety under the reformatory process under section 16(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act for a period of three years. The Appeal filed has been dismissed.

4. Records reveals that the presence of the Petitioner-CICL has been secured only on 21.08.2021 on the strength of the Warrant of Apprehension. The Juvenile Justice Board had disposed of the matter on 26.02.2016 and then despite the dismissal of the Appeal, the Petitioner-CICL having not appeared in obedience to the condition imposed on him, Warrant of Apprehension (WA) has been issued for his production.

4. Taking into account the submissions made; further keeping in view the findings of the Courts below as also the subsequent conduct of the Petitioner-CICL and other surrounding circumstances; this Court finds that the prayer, as advanced, does not merit acceptance.

5. The I.A. is accordingly dismissed.

(D. Dash), Judge.

       Order No.                    CRLREV No.528 of 2019
          11.      1.     Office is directed to issue reminder to the forums below for

early dispatch of the LCR and on its receipt, do the needful in placing the matter before the assigned Bench for hearing.

(D. Dash), Judge.

Basu