Ajit Mallik vs State Of Odisha .... Opp. Parties
2024 Latest Caselaw 16453 Ori

Orissa High Court

Ajit Mallik vs State Of Odisha .... Opp. Parties on 8 November, 2024

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                           CRLMC No.3902 of 2024

             Ajit Mallik                       ....        Petitioner

                                        Mr. A.R. Panda, Advocate

                                    -versus-


             State of Odisha                   ....      Opp. Parties

                                               Mr. S.N. Biswal, ASC

         CORAM:
               JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order                      ORDER
 No.                     08.11.2024
 01.    1.     This   matter   is   taken   up      through   Hybrid

Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. Heard.

3. The petitioner is one of the accused in FIR being Mangalpur P.S. Case No.226 of 2021 corresponding to C.T. Case No.894-A of 2021 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur.

4. The informant of the present case is the brother of the deceased and the present petitioner is the brother-in-law of the deceased. Charge sheet was filed in the present case on 29.08.2021 showing the present petitioner to be an absconder. However, the other accused persons, the husband of the deceased and father in law of the deceased faced the trial. The learned District & Sessions Judge, Jajpur vide its judgment dated 30.08.2024 in C.T. (S) Case No.42 of 2022, has acquitted the accused persons, who have faced the trial. The learned trial Court has recorded the following finding:

"The independent witnesses and the family members of the deceased as well as accused persons have not deposed clearly in support of prosecution rather their evidence goes against the prosecution story. The P.W.6, P.W.7 and P.W.IO have stated that the deceased while cooking in stove, came in contact with fire. P.W.4 has stated that the deceased was suffering from mental ill health and set her on fire. The said version of the witnesses goes against the prosecution

5. In view of the non-trustworthy nature of evidence adduced by the prosecution, both the co-accused has been acquitted.

6. Relying upon the said judgment of the learned trial Court, the petitioner submits that subjecting the petitioner to the trial would be a futile exercise as there is no evidence born on record against him.

7. I am not impressed by the submission made by Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner because the evidence adduced by the prosecution qua the accused persons those who have faced the trial. On the strength of those evidences adduced by the prosecution the complicity of the accused persons and involvement of the present petitioner cannot be elucidated. Therefore, it is inevitable for him to face the trial.

8. Keeping in view the nature of evidence came on record and the allegation form part of the charge amit

sheet, I am of the considered view that the petitioner should appear before the learned Court below on or before 30.11.2024 and face the trial. He may move appropriate application for grant of bail. If such an application is moved, he shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as deem and just proper by the learned Court below bounding him down to appear for facing trial without fail on each date of hearing.

9. With this observation, the CRLMC is disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack