Orissa High Court
Chinni @ Gorala Vijaya Kumar vs The State Of Odisha on 9 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No. 4127 of 2022
Chinni @ Gorala Vijaya Kumar .... Petitioner
Mr. Ashok Das, Advocate
-Versus-
The State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. Sitikanta Mishra, ASC
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
09.01.2023
Order No.
01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. Instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the
petitioner praying for quashing of the impugned order of
cognizance dated 25th February, 2020 and the consequential order
dated 23rd September, 2021 (Annexure-3 series) passed by the
learned S.D.J.M., Paralakhemundi in G.R. Case No.267 of 2018 on
the ground of compromise between the parties.
3. Perused the copy of the chargesheet at Annexure-2 and
other documents.
4. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that six
other co-accused persons faced trial in S.T. Case No.50 of 2021 and
have been acquitted of all the charges vide judgment dated 17th
January, 2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, ASJ,
Gajapati, Paralakhemundi, who passed the judgment basing on the
hostile evidence of the informant and other witnesses and
considering the same, the criminal proceeding initiated against the
petitioner may be quashed against the petitioner as no fruitful
purpose would be served in the continuance of the same subjecting
him to a full-fledged trial. While claiming so, Mr. Das, learned
counsel for the petitioner submits copies of the depositions of the
witnesses as at Annexure-4. Further, the copy of the acquittal
judgment in S.T. No.50 of 2022 at Annexure-5 is also perused.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there may
not be any further improvement in the evidence in view of the
acquittal of the six accused persons from all charges by the leaned
court below.
6. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the State admits the fact
that it was hostile evidence in respect of P.W.2. Considering the
depositions as at Annexure-4, the Court finds that P.W.2 was
examined under Section 154 Cr.P.C. by the prosecution and but he
did not support the prosecution at all. Two other witnesses have
been examined by the prosecution but they also turned hostile
resulting in passing of the judgment under Annexure-5. Under the
above circumstances, the Court is of the view that it would be a
futile exercise to subject the petitioner to a full blown trial especially
when considering the evidence of P.W.2, namely, informant and
having said that it is of the conclusion that inherent jurisdiction
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised to quash the
proceeding against him in G.R. Case No.267 of 2018.
7. Accordingly, it is ordered.
8. Consequently, the CRLMC stands allowed.
9. In the result, the impugned order of cognizance dated 25th
February, 2020 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Paralakhemundi
and the proceeding in G.R. Case No.267 of 2018 arising out of
Paralakhemundi P.S. Case No.112 of 2018 vis-à-vis the petitioner is
hereby quashed.
10. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
U.K.Sahoo
