Orissa High Court

Informant/Victim vs State Of Odisha And on 7 May, 2025

Author: S.K. Sahoo

Bench: S.K. Sahoo

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                           CRLA No.487 of 2025

            Informant/victim                 .....     Appellant

                                        Mr. S.S. Ray-2, Advocate
                                         -versus-
            State of Odisha and              .....   Respondents
            others
                                        Mr. Jateswar Nayak, AGA,

                                     CORAM:
                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

                                    ORDER

Order No. 07.05.2025

01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

This CRLA has been filed under section 419 BNSS 2025 by the victim/informant challenging the judgment and order dated 19.02.2025 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge

-cum- Special Judge, Paralakhemundi, Gajapati in acquitting the respondent no.2 Tiki @ Dibya Mohan Bira of the charges under sections 376(2)(n)/ 376AB/ 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, section 66-A of the Information Technology Act and section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act so also respondent no.3 Kunmun @ Sudipta Lima of the charge under section 212/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset submits that he does not want to press this appeal so far as respondent no.3 is concerned.

In view of such submission,this CRLA so far as

respondent no.3 Kunmun @ Sudipta Lima stands disposed of.

Let the learned counsel for the State obtain instruction as to whether the State is intending to prefer an appeal challenging the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned trial Court.

It appears that the victim/informant has been examined as P.W.2 in the learned trial Court and from the evidence recorded by the learned trial Court, it reveals that the name of the victim is not only mentioned in the deposition sheet but also her detailed address has been reflected in that sheet and the signature of the victim has been obtained in the deposition sheet. Her name is also mentioned in the list of prosecution witnesses in page no.29 of the impugned judgment. In spite of specific guidelines provided by the judgments pronounced by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of State of Punjab -Vrs.- Gurmit Singh reported in 1996 (2)Supreme Court Cases 384, Nipun Saxena -Vrs- Union of India, reported in (2019) 2 Supreme Court Cases 703 and Ms. X -Vrs.- State of Maharashtra reported in (2004) 1 Supreme Court Cases 421 and this Court in the case of Dabu -Vrs.- State of Odisha and others reported in (2024) I.L.R. CUT 124, the trial Court appears to be blissfully ignorant about the same. Taking into account the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court, the Court also on administrative side instructed to all the District Judges of the State vide letter No.5557 dated 06.04.2024 in that respect, which reads as follows:

" I am to say that that in paragraph 8 of judgment dated 28.03.2024 passed in JCRLA No. 14 of 2021 (Dabu @ Santosh Kumar Munda Vrs. State of

Odisha) and CRLA No. 135 of 2021 (Mukuna @ Dhanu @ Dhanuram Kerei) the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa, with reference to the provisions contained in section 228-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 33(7) of POCSO Act, 2012, has been pleased to observe as follows:

"In the deposition sheet of the victim of rape, the learned trial Court has recorded the name of the victim, which should not have been done. He/she should be mentioned as victim' therein. The signature of the victim in his/her deposition should not be taken on the deposition sheet but should be taken in a separate sheet by the learned trial Judge and the said sheet of paper with the signature and certificate of the Judge with date shall be kept in sealed cover. A noting should be given in the deposition sheet so also in the order sheet of that day regarding taking of signature of the victim in a separate sheet and keeping the same in sealed cover. The said procedure should also be followed while recording statement of the victim under section 164 of Cr.P.C. In the judgment, the name of the victim should never be mentioned by the Judge."

As directed, a copy of the aforementioned judgment dated 28.03.2024 is communicated herewith for information and circulation of the same among all the Judicial Officers working in the

respective judgeships for compliance of the observations made in Paragraph-8 of the judgment scrupulously."

Let an explanation be called for from the learned trial Court in that respect.

The explanation should be furnished in a sealed cover so as to reach this Court on or before 14th May, 2025. Registrar (Judicial) shall communicate the order to the learned trial Court by 08.05.2025.

List this matter in the week commencing from 23rd June 2025.

Learned counsel for the State shall obtain instruction in the meantime.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

(S. S. Mishra) Judge PKSahoo

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA