State vs Suresh Tanty & Ors. ..... Opp. Parties
2025 Latest Caselaw 8138 Ori

Orissa High Court

State vs Suresh Tanty & Ors. ..... Opp. Parties on 11 September, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                   CRLLP No.31 of 2005

            State                                .....                 Petitioner
                                                           Represented By Adv. -
                                                           U.C. Jena, A.S.C.


                                           -versus-

            Suresh Tanty & Ors.                   .....             Opp. Parties
                                                           Represented By Adv. -


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

                        CRLLP No.31 of 2005 & I.A. No.39 of 2005

                                           ORDER

11.09.2025

Order No.

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

2. Heard learned counsel for the State-Petitioner. Perused the application as well as the impugned judgment dated 27.07.2004.

3. The Opposite parties-accused persons in the present petition faced trial in 2(c)CC No.01 of 1994 for commission of an offence punishable under Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966. Upon conclusion of the trial, the court of learned JMFC, Panposh vide judgment dated 27.07.2004

found that the accused persons are not guilty as alleged and, accordingly, they were acquitted of the charges under Section 248(1) of the Cr.P.C.

4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of acquittal passed in the abovenoted 2(c)CC No.01 of 1994, the State has approached this Court by filing the present application under Section 378(1) and (3) of the Cr.P.C. seeking leave to prefer an appeal against the aforesaid judgment of acquittal.

5. On perusal of the record it appears that the leave petition was initially presented on 15.02.2005 with a delay of 92 days. A Misc. case No.39 of 2005 was filed along with the petition seeking condonation of the delay. By order dated 19.01.2007, this Court issued notice to the Opposite Parties. Although the office report reveals that such notice issued to the Opposite Parties were not served properly, however, no steps were taken by the State- Petitioner to ensure that the fresh notices were issued to the Opposite Parties and the same are duly served. Unfortunately, the matter is being listed more than two decades after the same was filed. On perusal of the record it appears that the delay has not been condoned as of now.

6. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, further keeping in view the fact that the leave petition is pending since 2005 without even the delay being condoned, it is unfair if the delay is condoned after two decades and leave is granted to the State-Petitioner to prefer an appeal against the judgment of acquittal. In view of the aforesaid position, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay and grant leave to the State-petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the leave application is dismissed both on limitation and as well as on merit.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil

Designation: Junior Stenographer

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 12-Sep-2025 19:23:33