Orissa High Court
Naliniprabha Dandasena vs State Of Odisha on 7 July, 2025
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra, Savitri Ratho
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMA No. 27 of 2025
Naliniprabha Dandasena ..... Appellant
Mr. Shyam Manohar, Advocate
Assisted by Mr. Amaresh Kumar,
Advocate
Vs.
State of Odisha ..... Respondent
Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
07.07.2025
Order No. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
03.
2. This CRLMA has been filed with a prayer to recall order
dated 18th January, 2021 passed in CRLA No. 286 of 2016 and to
restore the CRLA to file.
3. Mr. Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
CRLA No. 286 of 2016 was filed by the father of the
petitioner/appellant, namely, Netrananda Dandasena, who was a
government servant.
4. The CRLA was filed assailing the judgment and conviction
of the sentence dated 26th April, 2016 passed by the learned
Sessions Judge, Rayagada in Criminal Trial No.48 of 2014
convicting the appellant under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal
Code (in short "the IPC") for having conspired to murder the
deceased punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and sentencing
him to undergo life imprisonment. During pendency of the appeal,
the appellant, namely, Netrananda Dandasena died leaving behind
his legal heirs.
5. Mr. Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner drew
attention of this Court to order dated 18th January, 2021 passed in
CRLA No. 286 of 2016 which reads as under.
"This matter is taken up through video
conferencing mode because of COVID-19 pandemic.
Heard.
The sole appellant-Netrananda Dandasena is
stated to have expired in the meantime. This court gave
a chance to the legal heir of the appellant to come
forward to be substituted and notice was issued to his
daughter.
None appears inspite of sufficiency of notice.
Again time was granted on 16.11.2020 awaiting for
appearance of the daughter of the appellant. On
14.12.2020 also another chance was given to the
daughter of the deceased appellant to appear. But none
has appeared till date.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the State
that the case is one of substantive sentence only and no
fine has been imposed.
Regard being had to such facts, the appeal against
the appellant - Netrananda Dandasena abates on his
death and the appeal is accordingly dismissed as
abated."
He however submits that no notice whatsoever was served
on the petitioner/appellant, who is the unmarried daughter of said
Netrananda Dandasena. As Netrananda Dandasena was convicted
under Section 120-B IPC and directed to undergo life
imprisonment, his pensionary benefits were not released. Had the
petitioner/appellant being given an opportunity to contest the
appeal, the result of the appeal would have been otherwise. It is his
submission that due to intervention of pandemic of COVID-19 as
well as demise of the counsel for the appellant, the CRLMA could
not be filed in time. However, the petitioner/appellant had earlier
filed CRLMA No. 8 of 2024 for the self-same relief as prayed in
this present CRLMA. The said CRLMA was disposed of as
withdrawn vide order dated 5th February, 2025 with a liberty to the
petitioner/appellant to file a better application. Accordingly, the
present CRLMA has been filed.
6. Mr. Manohar, learned counsel in his elaborate submission
drew attention of this Court to the grounds taken in CRLMA. It is
his submission that the appellant being a government servant and
due to the judgment of conviction and sentence his pensionary
benefits have not been released. The petitioner/appellant being the
unmarried daughter is also deprived of the family pension. He,
therefore, prays for recalling order dated 18th January, 2021 by
which CRLA No.286 of 2016 was dismissed for non-prosecution
and to restore the CRLA for hearing on merit.
7. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel does not
have any serious objection for restoration of the CRLA No.286 of
2016.
8. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court
finds that although stamp reporting has been done but no defect
has been pointed out. As such, this Court proceeds to adjudicate
the CRLMA on merit.
9. Upon hearing Mr. Manohar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and on perusal of the order-sheet in CRLA No. 286 of
2016, this Court finds that during pendency of the appeal, the
appellant, namely, Netrananda Dandsena in CRLA No. 286 of
2016 expired leaving behind his legal heirs. But none of the legal
heirs came forward to prosecute the appeal for which it was
dismissed for non-prosecution on 18th January, 2021. This Court
has passed a reasoned order on 18th January, 2021 to dismiss the
CRLA for non-prosecution.
10. It is however submitted by Mr. Manohar, learned counsel
for the petitioner that no notice whatsoever was served on the
present petitioner/appellant to prosecute the CRLA. On the
otherhand, due to the judgment of conviction and sentence, a
stigma remains against her father and she is deprived of family
pension.
11. After dismissal of CRLA No.286 of 2016, IA No.951 of
2021 had been filed by Abha Dandasena, wife of the appellant, for
permission to prosecute the appeal by substituting her husband as
the appellant. IA No.2158 of 2024 was filed by the present
petitioner with a prayer to restore CRLA No.286 of 2016 and for
withdrawal of IA No.951 of 2021. These I.As are pending.
12. Keeping in mind that the petitioner who is the unmarried
daughter of the diseased appellant, is interested to pursue the
appeal, this Court feels it proper to recall order dated 18th January,
2021 and restore CRLA No.286 of 2016 and order accordingly.
13. Hence, the order dated 18th January, 2021 is recalled and
CRLA No.286 of 2016 is restored to file.
14. The CRLMA is accordingly disposed of.
15. CRLA No.286 of 2016 may be listed for orders before the
appropriate Bench indicating the name of Mr. Shyam Manohar,
Advocate in the cause list.
(K.R.Mohapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
RKS
