[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Surya Narayan Das vs Republic Of India .... Opp. Party on 19 January, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRREV No. 64 of 2002
Surya Narayan Das .... Petitioner
Ms. A.K. Dei, Advocate
on behalf of Mr. D.P. Das, Advocate
-versus-
Republic of India .... Opp. Party
Mr. Sarthak Nayak,
Special Retainer Counsel for CBI
CRREV No. 65 of 2002
Laxminarayan Das .... Petitioner
Ms. A.K. Dei, Advocate
on behalf of Mr. D.P. Das, Advocate
-versus-
Republic of India .... Opp. Party
Mr. Sarthak Nayak,
Special Retainer Counsel for CBI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
Order No. 19.01.2026
(Through hybrid Mode)
13. 1. These revisions have been filed challenging the common
judgment and order dated 19.12.2001 passed in Criminal Appeal
No.1/57 of 2000 and Criminal Appeal No.29/55 of 2000 by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.3,
Bhubaneswar confirming the conviction of the petitioners in both
the revisions passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate -cum- Special C.J.M. (C.B.I.), Bhubaneswar in S.P.E.
Case No. 28 of 1991.
2. Pursuant to order dated 25.09.2025, as the learned counsel
for the Petitioners had submitted that both the Petitioners were
dead, the learned counsel for the CBI had been directed to obtain
instructions regarding the whereabouts and wellbeing of the
Petitioners by the next date. The matter was not listed on
03.11.2025. When the matter was listed on 13.01.2026, Mr.
Manish Dhir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Sarthak
Nayak, learned Special Retainer Counsel for the CBI submitted
that they have received instructions that the whereabouts of the
Petitioners could not be ascertained, but the instruction was not
filed, the matter was adjourned to today.
3. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, learned Special Public Prosecutor
-cum- Retainer Counsel for the CBI files the appearance memo
on behalf of the Respondent.
4. The memo dated 16.01.2025 has been filed on 16.01.2026
enclosing instructions dated 03.11.2025 in connection with the
present CRREV No. 64 of 2002 and CRREV No. 65 of 2002 as
well as CRREV No. 524 of 2004 (Petitioner - Sri Ramnath
Patra) and CRREV No. 370 of 2002, CRREV No. 371 of 2002,
CRREV No. 372 of 2002 (Petitioner - Benudhar Patra). The
memo along with instructions and appearance memo of Mr.
Sarthak Nayak, learned Special Public Prosecutor -cum- Retainer
Counsel for the CBI are taken on record. The same shall be
scanned and incorporated in the digital record.
5. A memo signed by Mr. D.P. Das, learned counsel for the
Petitioners has been filed that although instructions have been
received from the relatives of the Petitioners that they have
expired in the meanwhile but the information regarding exact
date of their death has not been supplied. The memo is taken on
record.
6. In view of the fact that the learned counsel for the
Respondent has not been able obtain instruction regarding
whereabouts of the Petitioners after the learned counsel for the
Petitioners reported that the Petitioners are dead, both the
CRREVs are dismissed on account death of the Petitioners. But
liberty is granted to the parties to file an application for recall of
this order in case it is found that the Petitioners are still alive.
7. Copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial
Court forthwith.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Sukanta/RKS
Signed by: SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Date: 21-Jan-2026 20:47:51
