Orissa High Court
M/S. Seven Hills Estate vs State Of Odisha & Another .... Opp. ... on 7 March, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.919 of 2025
M/s. Seven Hills Estate .... Petitioner
Ltd., Puri Mr.Prasant
Kishore Ray,
Advocate and
Mr. K.C. Dash,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opp. Parties
Mr.J.P.Patra,
Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
CRLMC No.919 of 2025 & I.A. No.664 of 2025
Order ORDER
No. 07.03.2025
01.
1.
Mr. P.K. Ray, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that two F.I.Rs. being EOW,
Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.18 of 2016 and F.I.R. in
C.T. Case No.16 of 2016 have been registered against
the petitioner by the investors in the same project. He
further submits that the precise allegation in both the
cases is that the investors are aggrieved by the fact
that the flats though handed over to them, have not
yet been registered and as per the promise made to
them all facilities and amenities are not provided as
promised.
2. In so far as the F.I.R. in C.T. Case No.16 of 2016
is concerned, the charge sheet was filed. The
petitioner moved an application for discharge, which
was turned down by the order dated 31.07.2024. The
petitioner assailed the said order passed by the
Presiding Officer, Designated Court, Cuttack by filing
FAO No.472 of 2024. The Coordinate Bench of this
Court, vide order dated 24.12.2024, while issuing
notice to the opposite party, has passed interim order
as under:
"As an interim measure, it is directed that the
operation of impugned order/judgment dated
31.07.2024 passed by the learned Presiding
Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act, Cuttack
in I.A. No.03 of 2018 shall remain stayed till the
next date of listing of this matter."
3. Mr. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the present case is emanating from the
other connected F.I.R. In the present case, the
petitioner is assailing the order of cognizance dated
20.11.2018 passed by the learned Presiding Officer,
Designated Court, OPID, Cuttack.
4. Issue notice.
5. Mr. Patra, learned counsel appearing for the
State-OPID waives the notice.
6. Issue notice to the opposite party No.2 by
Registered Post with A.D./Speed Post with A.D.
Requisites shall be filed by tomorrow.
7. Mr. Patra, learned counsel opposes the interim
prayer. He submits that in the present case as well,
the application moved by the present petitioner for
discharge under Section 239 of the Cr. P.C. has been
rejected. Therefore, after having obtained the rejection
order from the trial Court on their application for
discharge, it is not open for the petitioner to assail the
order dated 20.11.2018 instead of challenging the
cognizance order.
8. Confronted with the said position, Mr. Ray,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not only challenging the cognizance order
but also challenging the entire criminal prosecution
initiated against him.
9. Be that as it may, the scope of the petition shall
be considered on the next date of hearing.
10. In the meantime, the further proceeding in C.T.
No.16 of 2016 pending in the Court of the learned
Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act,
Cuttack arising out of EOW, Bhubaneswar P.S. Case
No.18 of 2016 is stayed till the next date.
11. List this matter along with FAO No.472 of 2024
on 05.05.2025.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Subhasis
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 07-Mar-2025 17:38:23
