State Of Orissa vs Poti Lakhan Patra
2023 Latest Caselaw 7044 Ori

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                     CRLLP No. 97 of 2005

            State of Orissa                              ....          Petitioner
                                                          Mr. Rajesh Tripathy
                                                  Additional Standing Counsel
                                          -versus-
            Poti Lakhan Patra                           ....     Opposite Party


                         CORAM:
                         THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                         JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

                                         ORDER

Order No. 21.06.2023 Misc. Case No.58 of 2005 & CRLLP No.97 of 2005

04. 1. There is a delay of 170 days in preferring the present leave petition by the State seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 6th October, 2004 passed by the Sessions Judge, Ganjam- Gajapati, Berhampur in S.C. No.260 of 2003 whereby it acquitted the Opposite Party-accused for the offences under Sections 302, 498-A and 406 of IPC read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. There, the Opposite Party was charged of having committed the murder of his deceased-wife apart from harassing her for dowry.

2. On the application for condonation of delay, this Court directed notice to issue on 9th April, 2021. The notice has been returned with the endorsement "no such person on the address, so returned to sender".

3. The Court finds that the explanation offered for the delay of 170 days in filing the criminal leave petition is totally unconvincing. It

refers only on administrative reasons of the file moving from one department to another within the Government. This kind of explanation has been consistently refused to be accepted by the Supreme Court in a series of pronouncements including Office of the Chief Post Master General v. Living Media India Ltd. (2012) 3 SCC 563 and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bherulal (2020) 10 SCC

654. Consequently, the Court is not convinced that any proper explanation has been offered by the State for the extraordinary delay of 170 days in filing the present criminal leave petition.

4. Nevertheless, the criminal leave petition has also been examined on merits. The case turned entirely on circumstantial evidence which, on a careful analysis by the trial Court, was not found to unerringly point to the guilt of the Opposite Party. There were many unanswered questions in the narration of the prosecution and, therefore, the Opposite Party was extended the benefit of doubt.

5. After carefully examining the evidence and with the assistance of learned counsel for the State, the Court is unable to come to a conclusion different than that reached by the trial Court. No grounds have been made out for interference even on merits.

6. Accordingly, the criminal leave petition is dismissed both on the grounds of limitation as well as on merits.

(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice

(G. Satapathy) Judge Signature NotS. Behera Verified Digitally Signed

Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Jun-2023 11:44:28