Orissa High Court
Mrtunjaya Mishra vs State Of Orissa And Others ..... ... on 26 August, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLLP No.104 of 2004
Mrtunjaya Mishra ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s.s.k.dash
-versus-
State of Orissa and others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Digambara Mishra
Mr. U.C. Jena, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
26.08.2025
Order No.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. This is an application for condonation of delay in presentation
of the petition by 36 days.
3. Learned counsel for the Informant-Petitioner at the outset
contended that the delay was caused due to arrangement of papers
and engaging a counsel to prepare the petition.
4. Learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties as well as the
accused-Opposite Party Nos.2 to 4 objected to the condonation of
delay on the ground that the same has not been properly explained.
5. Considering the fact that there is a delay of only 36 days and
that the appeal is at the instance of the Informant, the delay in filing
the petition is hereby condoned.
6. Accordingly, the M.C. stands allowed.
7. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsels for the Opposite Parties. Perused the application as well as
the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 31.07.2004 passed by the
learned Adhoc Addl. District & Sessions Judge Fast Tract Court,
Nayagarh in Crl. Appeal No.100/16 of 2002/98.
8. The aforesaid appeal was preferred by the Appellant
challenging the order of conviction under Sections 323/34 of IPC
and against sentence to undergo S.I. for three months and further the
accused-Appellant before the Lower Appellate Court, namely Rabi
Das was convicted under Section 294 of IPC and he was sentenced
to additional imprisonment for one month by the learned J.M.F.C.,
Nayagarh. The learned Lower Appellate Court, after hearing the
parties in the appeal, set aside the order of conviction and the
sentence passed by the learned Magistrate. On perusal of the record,
it appears that the impugned judgment was delivered on 31.07.2004
and in the meantime two decades have elapsed.
9. Taking into consideration the gravity and seriousness of the
allegation, further keeping in view the fact that more than two
decades have elapsed in the meantime, this Court finds no
justification in granting leave at this belated stage which would
otherwise cause prejudice to the accused-opposite parties, who have
already been acquitted.
10. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the CRLLP application
stands dismissed.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
