Satya Rana And Others vs State Of Orissa
2025 Latest Caselaw 5578 Ori

Orissa High Court

Satya Rana And Others vs State Of Orissa on 19 August, 2025

         THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                           CRA No.73 of 1997

(In the matter of an application under Section 374 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973)


Satya Rana and others                  .......                   Appellants

                                 -Versus-

State of Orissa                        .......                  Respondent

For the Appellants : Mr. S.N. Mishra-4, Advocate

For the Respondent : Mr. A.K. Apat, AGA

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Date of Hearing: 24.07.2025 :: Date of Judgment: 19.08.2025

S.S. Mishra, J. The present Criminal Appeal, is filed by the appellants

under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C., assailing the judgment and order dated

31.03.1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Titilagarh

in Sessions Case No. 100/24 of 1995, whereby the learned trial Court has

convicted the accused-appellant- No.1 for the offence U/s.148/452/325 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for

one year under Section 148 of IPC and R.I. for one year and to pay fine

of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for one month on each count

under Sections 452 and 325 of IPC; the appellant nos.2 and 3 have been

convicted under Sections 148/323 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo

R.I. for one year under Section 148 of IPC and R.I. for four months

under Section 323 of IPC and appellant nos.4 and 5 have been convicted

under Sections 148/323/452 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I.

for one year under Section 148 of IPC, R.I. for one year and to pay fine

of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for one month for the offence

under Section 452 of IPC and R.I. for four months under Section 323 of

IPC.

2. The prosecution case tersely stated is that on 31.01.1994 at about

4.45 P.M. in the colony of Straw Board Industries Pvt. Ltd. the accused

persons being armed with iron rod, chain, lathi etc. entered into the

colony with an object to commit murder of the employees of the

company, namely, the informant Prafulla Kumar Chand, Ramsinghasan

Tiwari, Sadhu Charan Patel and Santosh Bhoi by trespassing into the

residence of Ranjit Mishra assaulted him and his brother Mandhata

Mishra and forcibly entered inside the residence of Ujal Chandra Giri

and assaulted him and committed theft of his watch, cash and other

articles and scolded in filthy language and threatened the employees with

bodily injury.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, Titilagarh P.S. Case No.

15 dated 31.01.1994 was registered for the offence punishable under

Sections 147/148/307/452/380/506/149 of IPC, which corresponds to

G.R. Case No. 26 of 1994 After investigation, charges were framed

against the appellants for the offences, as mentioned above and they

were put to trial.

4. Heard Mr. S.N. Mishra-4, learned counsel for the appellants and

Mr. A.K. Apat, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.

5. The prosecution in order to bring home the charges examined as

many as fifteen witnesses, whereas the defence took a stand of denial

and claimed trial.

6. P.W.1, was the informant; P.W.2 was an employee of the

company and also an eye witness to the occurrence; P.W.3 was also

another eye witness to the occurrence and seizure; P.W.4 was another

employee of the company and witness to the seizure; P.Ws. 6, 8, 9, 10,

11 and 12, the employees and ex-employees of the company were the

victim-injured persons; P.W.7 was an employee, who was a post

occurrence witness; P.Ws.13 and 15 were the two doctors, who

examined the injured persons; P.W.5 and P.W.14 were the two

Investigating Officers of the present case.

7. The learned trial Court after thorough analysis of all the evidence

on record arrived at the following conclusion:-

"18. Before parting with the judgment it may be observed that there is no acceptable evidence that -

(1) All the 29 accused persons had taken part in the alleged crime;

(2) all the accused persons had trespassed inside the residence of P.Ws. 10, 11 and 12;

(3) Theft from the residence of P.Ws.10, 11 and 12 was committed by any of the accused persons; and (4) accused persons had intended to attempt on any one's life.

19. From the above discussion it is to be concluded that prosecution has been successful in establishing that on 31.1.94 at 4.45 P.M. in the staff colony of Straw Board Industries Pvt. Ltd. At Chormara accused persons Rohita Bagarty,

Dharanidhar Sahu, Ramakanta Sahu, Lingaraj Bag and Satya Bagarty were members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lathi, iron pipe, electric wire, brick bat etc. accused persons Rohita, Dharani and Satya had trespassed into the residence of P.Ws.10, 11 and 12 after making preparation to cause hurt to them, accused Satya caused grievous hurt to P.Ws.11 and 12 by assaulting them with iron pipe/iron rod and accused persons Rohita, Dharanidhar, Ramakanta and Lingaraj Bag assaulted other injured persons by means of lathi, electric wire, iron rod etc. causing simple injuries on their person.

20. In the result, accused persons Rohita Bagarty, Dharanidhar Sahu are found guilty U/s 148, 323 and 452 I.P.C., accused persons Ramakanta Sahu and Lingaraj Bag U/S 148 and 323 I.P.C. and accused Satya Bagarty U/S 148, 452 and 325 I.P.C. and are convicted thereunder. Remaining accused persons are acquitted enjoying benefit of doubt U/S 235 (1) Cr. P.C. and are discharged from their bail bonds."

8. The appellants are aggrieved by the findings recorded by the

learned Court below holding them guilty of the offences, as mentioned

above and sentenced them on that count, therefore, they have filed the

present appeal.

9. In the present case, as many as eight persons have been injured,

out of them, the prosecution has examined six witnesses, namely, P.Ws.

1, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Twenty-nine accused persons stood charged for

the alleged commission of offence under Sections 147/14/452/380/506/

307/149 of IPC. Out of them, five accused persons those who were

accused nos.17, 22, 24, 26 and 29 are convicted. All these five accused

those who have been convicted, have preferred the present appeal.

During the pendency of the appeal, accused no.22, i.e., appellant no.2

has died. Therefore, the appeal qua him stood abated. In so far as the

appellant nos.1, 3, 4 and 5 are concerned, all of them were arrested on

22.03.1994 and were granted bail by the trial court on 26.03.1994. By

the impugned judgment dated 31.03.1997, the appellant no.1 has been

convicted for the offence under Sections 148/452/325 of IPC and has

been substantively sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year, whereas

appellant no.3 has been convicted for the offence under Sections 148/323

of IPC and also sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year. Similarly, the

appellant nos.4 and 5 have been convicted for the offence under Sections

148/452/323 of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for one

year.

10. Learned counsels appearing for both the parties have taken me to

the evidence on record to substantiate their respective case. By the help

of the learned counsels, I have gone through the entire evidence in detail.

Instead of adverting to the evidence of all the witnesses, it would be

enough to delve upon the evidence of the injured witnesses.

11. P.W.1, Prafulla Kumar Chand, in his testimony has categorically

stated that appellant nos.3, 4 and 5 were assaulted him by way of lathi

and iron rod. While they were assaulting, P.Ws.6, 8 and 9 and one

Sanjay Kumar Upadhya and Ajay Kumar Gupta came there and were

witnessed the incident. The said witness in paragraph-3 of his

examination-in-chief has stated as under:-

"3. At that time the production manager of the factory Ranjit Kumar Mishra came out from his house. The accused persons also assaulted him and out of fear he went inside his house to save his life. Then the accused persons entered inside his house and assaulted his brother Mandhata Mishra and looted away house hold articles, cash etc. from the house of Ranjit Kumar Mishra. Then the accused persons went to the house of Ujjal Chandra Giri, a mechanical engineer of the factory and entered inside his house and assaulted him and looted away watch, cash etc. from his house. Devendra Kumar Parija, Prafulla Kumar Rout, Damodar Mishra, Ashok Kumar Patel and Sushanta Kumar Rout and others have seen the incident. Earlier the accused persons had threatened me and others to leave the job of the factory and go away failing which we will face dire consequences."

In his evidence, he has very categorically deposed that the brother of

Ranjit Kumar Mishra, namely, Mandhata Mishra was assaulted by the

accused persons. Mandhata Mishra was examined as P.W.12, who in his

testimony in para-2 has stated as under:

"2. The mob abused Mr. P.K. Chand and assaulted him. When we wanted to save P.K. Chand and intervened the pacify the situation, the accused persons namely, Rohit Bagarty, Dharani Sahu and Satya Rana assaulted my elder brother (p.w.11) for which he sustained injury. When I came to the rescue of my brother, accused Satya Rana assaulted me by iron rod causing injury on my left fore arm near wrist and it was a fracture injury. Accused Dharanidhar Sahu and Rohita Bagarty and others dealt me blows by lathi and also assaulted me by electric wire (hand made chain) causing injury on my body. Out of fear myself and my brother went inside our quarters. Then the accused persons followed us and brick bating and lathi blows broken out the window of our quarters and then came to our house and threatened us to leave the job and to go away. At the time of altercation, the wrist watch of my elder brother p.w.11 was lost. Then the accused persons went to the quarters of Ujal Giri. Then we came to Titilagarh P.S. from where we were sent to hospital for medical examination. I was examined by doctor."

Similarly, P.W.6-Ram Singhasan Tiwari, who was employed as a

security guard in the colony and was also assaulted by the accused

persons, inter alia, deposed as under:

"1. I know some of the accused persons present in the dock. I know Prafulla Kumar Chand. The occurrence took place on 31.1.94 at about 4.40 P.M. inside the paper mill premises in the colony. At that time I was on security guard duty in the backyard of the mill premises. I heard commotion from the colony side. Then I along with Sadhu Patel, Sanjay Upadhya and Santosh Bhoi went towards colony side, we saw the accused persons

assaulting Prafulla Kumar Chand. We came to his rescue to save him. Then accused Rohit, Dharani, Pankaj and others assaulted me by lathi and they also dealt me fist blows. Due to assault I sustained injury on the left wrist arm. When Ranjit Mishra, production manager of the mill and his brother Mandhata came to our rescue, then accused persons also assaulted them. Out of fear Ranjit and his brother Mandhata went inside the quarters but the accused persons charged after them and pelted stone to their houses and they also broke open the window. Later on I came to P.S. and was sent for medical examination."

P.W.8, who was also an injured witness has stated in his

examination-in-chief as under:

"1. I know the informant of this case Prafulla Kumar Chand, who was working as cashier in Spas Paper mill, Chormara. I am the director of the paper mill. I know the accused persons present in the dock. The occurrence took place on 31.1.94 at about 4.45 P.M. On the day of occurrence while I was present in the mill premises I heard commotion at the colony side. Then I along with Santosh Bhoi, Ajay Gupta, Sanjay Upadhya went to the colony side. Then we saw nearly 40 to 50 persons have surrounded the informant and they were assaulting him. Then we came to the rescue of the informant, Rohit Bagarty, Dharanidhar Sahu, Ramakanta Sahu, Satya Rana and others assaulted us by lathi. Accused Rohit Bagarty, Ramakanta Sahu, Dharanidhar Sahu assaulted me by lathi causing injury on my left hand wrist back, left leg and thigh and right hand. Ranjit Mishra and Mandhata Mishra of our mill came to our rescue. But the above noted persons also chased after Ranjit Mishra and Mandhata Mishra and assaulted them. Out of fear Ranjit Mishra and Mandhata Mishra went inside their houses. The accused persons chased after them and pleted stones and they also broke the T.V. antenna of Ujal Giri. The accused persons also broke the window and door of Ranjit Mishra by brick

bating. Then the informant came in a truck and reported the matter at Titilagarh police. We the injured persons came to Titilagarh in a jeep to P.S. and then sent to Titilagarh hospital for our medical examination."

P.W.10 has also narrated the event very meticulously and stated

that he was also assaulted by the accused persons and in paragraph-2 of

the examination in chief, he has stated as under:

"2. When I went outside the accused persons on seeing me pelted stones. Out of fear I came inside my house and closed the doors. Shortly after the accused persons by breaking open the door entered inside my house, accused Rohit Bagarty assaulted on my head by lathi causing bleeding injury. Accused Dharani gave the lashes by a electric wire causing injury on my back. Accused Satya Rana assaulted by G.I. pipe on my right knee causing injury. Due to assault and bleeding injury I felt dizzy and fell down. Others whom I cannot identify also assaulted me. Thinking me dead the accused persons left the place. Accused Biswamitra and accused Kamalu were also present in the mob."

P.W.11, Ranjit Kumar Mishra, who is an important witness, who

was the first victim at the hands of the accused persons in his testimony

in para-1 has stated as under:

"1. On 31.1.94 I was working in SPAA paper mill at Chomara in the capacity of production manager. On that day at about 4.30 P.M. I heard a commotion near colony side situated in the factory premises. On hearing noise I came out of the paper mill and went towards the colony. I saw 40 to 50 persons shouting the security supervisor of the mill Mr. Gupta, and other employees namely Mr. Upadhya and Mr. Tiwari and

Mr. Patel also followed me towards the colony side. On seeing the mob which was furious abused me in filthy language saying Sala Magiha etc. I saw the mob assaulting P.K. Chand. When Mr. Upadhya and Mr. Patel and Mr. Tiwari wanted to pacify the situation they requested the mob to desist from unlawful activity, the mob did not listen and assaulted Mr. Upadhya and others. When I intervened accused Satya Rana who was holding a pipe assaulted me causing injury on my left hand finger which was fractured. Accused Rohit Bagarty and accused Dharani Sahu assaulted me by lathi causing on my right fore arm and left thigh. When I was assaulted my younger brother Mandhata Mishra came to me. Then the accused persons leaving me assaulted Mandhata Mishra for which he sustained injuries. Then we went to our quarters to save ourselves from further assault. The mob followed us and pushed the door of my quarters by lathi and then they broke the doors of the quarters. 5 persons entered inside my drawing room. At that time my wrist watch was taken away by somebody which I could not find out. Then the mob broke the G.I. pipe fixed nearby with a T.V. antenna. Then the mob went inside the quarters of Ujal Giri and assaulted him, which I subsequently came to know. After half an hour Mr. Chand came in a truck to Titilagarh P.S. and shortly after we came to Titilagarh hospital in a jeep. I was medically examined on police requisition."

12. The version of the injured witnesses, as discussed above, has been

supported by not only the eye witness like P.W.2 and other witnesses,

but also draws corroboration from the formal witnesses like the seizure

witness and all. P.W.18 was the doctor, who had examined all the

injured. He in his testimony has stated that apart from P.W.9, P.Ws. 1, 8,

10, 11 and 12 and one Ajay Kumar Gupta and Sanjay Kumar Upadhya

were also examined by him. He has narrated the injury sustained by all

the injured persons, which has been caused by the main accused persons

in the testimony of P.Ws. 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. In the cross

examination, the said witness, namely, P.W.18 has stated as under:-

"11. I had no prior acquaintance with the injured persons. I remember that the injured persons told me that due to some quarrel they sustained injuries on their person. The examination of the injured was medico legal cases. I do not remember if I had informed the local police accordingly prior to my medical examination of the injured persons. I do not remember if I advised some of the injured persons to get themselves admitted in the hospital as indoor patients. If somebody had got bruises and abrasions on his person and comes to the hospital we generally do not admit him. In some cases without x-ray examination it can be well said that the injuries fractured and a grievous one."

13. Conjoint reading of the evidences, which has been brought on

record by the prosecution overwhelmingly, establishes the prosecution

version. Therefore, the appellants cannot escape from the conviction, as

recorded by the trial court. The trial court has very meticulously dealt

with the evidence of the witnesses to arrive at a conclusion that the

appellants whose names have been repeatedly taken by all the injured

witnesses are guilty of offences, as mentioned above. Therefore, I am not

inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. Hence, I affirm the

conviction recorded by the learned trial court against all the appellants.

14. At this stage, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the

appellants submitted that the incident relates back to the year 1994 and at

that point of time the appellants were in early thirties and at present the

appellants are in their mid-fifties and the fact that they have a clean

antecedent and they have already settled in their life. Therefore,

incarcerating them at this belated stage would be un-equitable and harsh.

In that view of the matter, Mr. Mishra, submitted that the substantive

sentence of one year imposed by the learned trial court may be reduced

to that of the sentence the appellants have already undergone or this

Court may take a lenient view by granting the benefit of the provisions

under the Probation of Offenders Act.

15. In view of the nature of offence committed by the appellants, I am

not inclined to take a lenient view, rather suffice to say that the period of

one year as sentenced to the appellants reduced down to the sentence

each of the appellants have already undergone. However, the appellants

shall pay a fine of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) each, in default,

they shall undergo R.I. for one month. The fine amount to be deposited

by each of the appellants, shall be disbursed to the injured persons

proportionately, in accordance with the provisions of Section 357 of

Cr.P.C.

16. The Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.

(S.S. Mishra) Judge The High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.

Dated the 19th August 2025/Ashok

Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA

Location: High Court of Orissa