Orissa High Court
Basanti Muduli vs State Of Odisha on 5 August, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.2897 of 2025
Basanti Muduli ..... Appellant
Represented By Adv. -
Amitav Tripathy
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Respondent
Represented By Adv. -
Mr.S.K.Parhi, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
05.08.2025
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the
learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused
the CRLMC application as well as the documents annexed
thereto.
3. By filing the present Application under section 528 of
BNSS, 2023 the Petitioner challenges the legality and
validity of the order dated 23.07.2025 passed by the
learned J.M.F.C., Nayagarh in G.R.Case No.166 of 2020.
Vide impugned order dated 23.07.2025 leaned trial court
has issued N.B.W. against the Petitioner as the Petitioner
was absent on the date of judgment.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset
contended that on 23.07.2025, learned J.M.F.C., Nayagarh
posted the G.R.Case No.166 of 2020 for pronouncement of
judgment. He further contended that out of total five
accused persons, four of them appeared against whom
judgment was pronounced. Further, due to sudden illness,
the Petitioner could not appear before the trial court on the
date fixed. Therefore, while pronouncing the judgment
against the other four accused persons, the judgement
against the accused-Petitioner has been deferred and
learned trial Court has issued N.B.W. against the Petitioner
to ensure her presence in court. Learned counsel for the
Petitioner also submitted that although application under
section 317 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the Petitioner, the
same was rejected without considering the grounds stated
therein. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner
submitted that the order dated 23.07.2025 at Annexure-1
issuing N.B.W. against the Petitioner is not sustainable in
law and the same is liable to be quashed.
5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State
has contended that the learned trial court has not
committed any illegality in passing the impugned order
under Annexure-1. He further contended that it is known to
the Petitioner that the judgment was to be pronounced on
23.07.2025. On the date of pronouncement of judgment
dated 23.07.2025 application under section 317 Cr.P.C.
filed by the learned counsel for the Petitioner was rejected
and deferred the case for pronouncement of judgment.
Therefore, learned Additional Government Advocate
submitted that it is a deliberate method adopted by the
Petitioner to prolong the trial. On such ground, learned
Additional Government Advocate submitted that the order
dated 23.07.2025 at Annexure-1 does not call for any
interference of this Court.
6. On careful examination of the documents and on
scrutiny of the order dated 23.07.2025 at Annexure-1, this
Court is of the view that the learned trial court has not
committed any illegality in passing the order dated
23.07.2025 at Annexur-1. Considering the submissions of
the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is
ready and willing to appear before the trial court, the
Petitioner is granted liberty to surrender before the learned
trial court in the aforesaid case within two weeks from today
and move an application for bail. In such eventuality,
learned trial court shall do the needful in accordance with
law and pass necessary order thereof. While considering
the application, learned trial court shall apply the principle of
parity.
7. With the aforesaid observation/direction the CRMC
application stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
RKS
Designation: AR-CUM-Senior Secretary
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 06-Aug-2025 18:44:58
