Pratap Chandra vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Parties
2026 Latest Caselaw 357 Ori

Orissa High Court

Pratap Chandra vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Parties on 15 January, 2026

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                      CRLREV No.1108 of 2025

    Pratap Chandra                     ....           Petitioner
    Maharana
                                  Mr. D.K. Panda, Advocate

                            -versus-

    1. State of Odisha                 ....   Opposite Parties
    2. Gyanranjan @ Babu
    Pradhan

                                        Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC

                      CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
                                    ORDER

15.01.2026 Order No.

01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. Assailing the Judgment/order of Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh dated 10.10.2025 acquitting the Opposite Party No.2 in Juv. Case No.05 of 2025 arising out of Khandapara P.S. Case No.309 dated 27.11.2024 for the offence under Section 281/106(1) of BNS read with Section 181 of M.V. Act, the present Criminal Revision has been filed.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the appreciation of the Juvenile Justice Board has been patently perverse so as to warrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

4. In fortifying his submission, learned counsel for the Petitioner primarily relies on the evidence of P.W.6 and P.W.9 which according to him have been wrongly construed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board.

5. This Court perused the deposition of P.W.6 as well as P.W.9 and also the observations of the learned Juvenile Justice Board that so far as P.W.6 is concerned, his credibility is also under a cloud since he admittedly had business relationship with the deceased and therefore it cannot be said that his statement is not biased.

6. This Court also carefully went through the depositions of the other witnesses on record including defence witnesses.

7. On a perspicuous analysis of the evidence on record, this Court is not persuaded to hold that the exercise of jurisdiction by the learned Juvenile Justice Board has resulted in miscarriage of justice warranting interference with an order of an acquittal of a Juvenile in conflict with law.

8. Accordingly, the CRLREV being devoid of merit stands disposed of.

(V. Narasingh)

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Judge Date: 16-Jan-2026 18:14:25

Ayesha