Pagili @ Parbati Das vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party
2025 Latest Caselaw 2775 Ori

Orissa High Court

Pagili @ Parbati Das vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 20 January, 2025

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                           CRLREV No.340 of 2023

             Pagili @ Parbati Das        ....             Petitioner
                                    Mr. H.K. Ratsingh, Advocate

                                  -versus-

             State of Odisha             ....        Opposite Party
                                               Mr. C.R. Swain, AGA


                       CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
                                     ORDER

20.01.2025 Order No.

03. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. Being aggrieved by the rejection of the application for discharge by order dated 16.03.2023 in the S.T. Case No.53/180 of 2022 registered under Section 498-A/304-B/306/34 of IPC and 4 of D.P. Act, the present CRLREV has been filed.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is the mother-in-law.

4. It is urged with vehemence by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that even if the entire allegation of the prosecution case is accepted at its face value, no arguable case is made out for the continuation of proceedings and is an abuse of the process of law.. In this context he relies on the

statements of two independent witnesses i.e. CSW No.13 and 14, namely, Tika @ Abhaya Kar and Prafulla Behera. Hence, he seeks interference by this Court

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer.

6. This Court perused the statements of the witnesses including that of the independent witnesses CSW 13 and 14 as well as the Informant-CSW-1.

7. It is trite law that at the stage of consideration of charge there cannot be a mini trial keeping in view the latest dictum of the Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan Vrs. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, reported in, (2021) 11 SCC 191.

8. On perusal of the impugned order and considering the same on the basis of materials available on record and on the touch stone of the Judgment of the Apex Court referred to hereinabove, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order so as to warrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

9. Accordingly, the CRLREV is disposed of.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge Signature Soumya Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SOUMYA RANJAN SAMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 21-Jan-2025 10:28:58