State Of Orissa vs Khema Chanda Parida And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 7187 Ori

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                     CRLLP No. 65 of 2008
            State of Orissa                             ....          Petitioner
                                                          Mr. G.N. Rout, ASC
                                    -versus-
            Khema Chanda Parida and Others              ....    Opposite Parties


                        CORAM:
                        THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                        JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
                                         ORDER

Order No. 03.07.2023

06. 1. The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 2nd February, 2008 of the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Puri in S.T. No.3/365 of 98/97 insofar as the 19 Opposite Parties have been acquitted of the offences under Sections 148/302/307/326/149 of IPC read with Section 25 of Arms Act and 9(b) of Indian Explosives Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the 19 Opposite Parties along with two others namely Dwijabar @ Duryodhan Parida and Akhaya Kumar Parida caused the death of two persons namely Suresh Pradhan and Ananga Pradhan by means of firing from their armed weapons and by throwing bombs.

3. This Court has with the assistance of the learned counsel for the Petitioner examined the evidence and the impugned judgment of the learned trial Court in that light. While the trial Court found the evidence against two of the accused namely Dwijabar and Akhaya to be convincing and the eye witness testimonies of PWs.2 to 5 establishing that they had fired with their guns on the deceased, the

prosecution was unable to link the overt acts of attributing to the remaining accused i.e. the present 19 Opposite Parties with the injuries suffered by some of the eye witnesses, by either of the deceased. Significantly, as far as deceased Ananga Pradhan is concerned, while he was shown to have died out of blast injuries. There was nothing in the testimonies of PWs.2 to 5 to point to any of the present Opposite Parties cause the death.

4. The judgment of the learned trial Court is a detailed one, which has carefully analyzed the entire evidence. The trial Court has made a clear distinction between the two accused convicted and the evidence as far as the present Opposite Parties are concerned, which did not bring home their guilt vis-à-vis the charges framed against them.

5. The Court is of the view that the impugned judgment of the trial Court is a well-reasoned one and does not call for interference. Accordingly, the Court declines the State leave to appeal against the impugned judgment vis-à-vis the Opposite Parties herein. The petition is accordingly dismissed.

\

(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice

(G. Satapathy) Judge

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PRIYAJIT SAHOO Designation: Jr.Stenographer Reason: Authentication Priyajit Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 04-Jul-2023 10:46:37