State Of Orissa vs Titulu Panda And Others ..... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 10162 Ori

Orissa High Court

State Of Orissa vs Titulu Panda And Others ..... Opposite ... on 18 November, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                CRLLP No.10 of 2008
            State of Orissa                .....         Petitioner
                                                            Represented By Adv. -

                                                            Smt. Sasmita Nayak, ASC

                                           -versus-
            Titulu Panda and others                .....          Opposite Parties
                                                            Represented By Adv. -
                                                            M/s.. P.C. Panda & Biswa
                                                            Ranjan Das

                                                            (For O.P. Nos.1, 3 & 4)

                                 CORAM:
            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

                                          ORDER

18.11.2025

Order No.

14. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. On perusal of the record, it appears that the present leave application has been filed by the State-Petitioner under Section 378(1) & (3) of the Cr.P.C. on 18.01.2008. At the time of filing of the application, there was a delay of about 200 days. A Misc. Case has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act with a prayer for condonation of delay.

3. On a close scrutiny of the order sheets, it reveals that on 10.01.2011, a notice was issued to the Opposite Parties on the question of limitation. After appearance of the Opposite Parties delay was condoned vide order dated 5.01.2015. Thereafter the matter was listed on 11.12.2015, 09.11.2023, 20.11.2023, 30.11.2023 and 06.11.2025. On that dates the case has been adjourned at the instance of the State-

Petitioner. Today when the matter was called, no one appears for the Opposite Parties.

4. Perused the impugned judgment dated 21.03.2007 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur in S.C. Case No.21/2000- GDC. Initially the Opposite Parties-Accused Persons faced the trial for commission of offences under Sections 294/341/307/34 of I.P.C., However, by virtue of impugned judgment, trial court has come to a conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish its case against the accused persons. In the ultimate analysis, the trial court found that the accused persons were not guilty of the offences charged against them and, accordingly, they have been acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. Being aggrieved by such judgment of acquittal, the State- Petitioner has preferred this leave application seeking leave to prefer an appeal against the judgment dated 21.03.2007.

5. Perused the impugned judgment dated 21.03.2007 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur in S.C. Case No.21/2000- GDC. On perusal of such judgment, this Court is of the view that the trial court has taken note of each and every evidence and by a detailed and reasoned judgment has acquitted the Accused-Opposite Parties.

6. On a careful analysis of the judgment of the trial court, this Court is of the view that the same does not call for any interference, more so, after expiry of more than one and half decades.

7. Accordingly, the CRLLP is dismissed.

( A.K. Mohapatra)

Debasis