Ganeswar Karmi vs State Of Orissa .... Opposite Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 2681 Ori

Orissa High Court

Ganeswar Karmi vs State Of Orissa .... Opposite Party on 20 March, 2026

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                 CRLREV No.82 of 2026

In the matter of an application under Section 397 read
with Section 401 of Cr.P.C.
                          ------------------

Ganeswar Karmi                ....                Petitioner
                          -versus-

State of Orissa                  ....       Opposite Party

For Petitioner               :    Mr. P. K. Nayak, Advocate

For Opposite Party           :    Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC

                   CORAM:
                   JUSTICE V. NARASINGH


      DATE OF HEARING AND JUDGMENT :20.03.2026

V. Narasingh, J.          Heard learned counsel for the

Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

1. This Criminal Revision has been filed

assailing the Judgment dated 16.01.2026 passed by

the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Titilagarh,

Balangir in Criminal Appeal No.15 of 2025, affirming

the order of conviction qua the Petitioner dated

24.09.2025 passed by the learned JMFC, Muribahal,

Balangir in G.R. Case No.393 of 2005 (T.R. No.84 of

2025) under Sections 3231/3412/3253/344 of I.P.C.

and imposing a sentence of S.I. of six months for

the offence under section 3231/344 I.P.C. and

undergo S.I. for a period of 15 days for the offences

u/s.341 I.P.C. and undergo S.I. for a period of 2

years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten

Thousand only) for the offences U/s.3253 I.P.C. All

the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The Petitioner along with the co-accused,

namely, Madhusudan Karmi and Bibhisan Karmi

faced trial being charged for commission of offences

323. Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.--Whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

341. Punishment for wrongful restraint.--Whoever wrongfully restrains any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.

325. Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt.--Whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

34. Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.-- When a criminal act is done by several persons, in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.

under Section 3412/3231/3253/2945/506/344 of I.P.C.

in G.R. Case No.393 of 2005 (T.R. No.84 of 2025)

on the file of the learned JMFC, Balangir arising out

of Titilagarh P.S. Case No.161 dated 21.09.2005.

3. The learned Trial Court by its judgment

dated 24.09.2025 convicted the co-accused of the

Petitioner under Sections 3231/344 I.P.C and

released them under Section 36 of the Probation of

Offenders Act, 19587 (hereinafter referred to as

'P.O. Act') after due admonition and convicted the

294. Obscene acts and songs.--Whoever, to the annoyance of others,--

(a) does any obscene act in any public place, or

(b) sings, recites or utters any obscene songs, ballad or words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both.

3. Power of court to release certain offenders after admonition.-- When any person is found guilty of having committed an offence punishable under Section 379 or Section 380 or Section 381 or Section 404 or Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), or any offence punishable with imprisonment for not more than two years, or with fine, or with both, under the Indian Penal Code or any other law, and no previous conviction is proved against him and the court by which the person is found guilty is of opinion that, having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, it is expedient so to do, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the court may, instead of sentencing him to any punishment or releasing him on probation of good conduct under Section 4 release him after due admonition.

Explanation.--For the purposes of this section, previous conviction against a person shall include any previous order made against him under this section or Section 4.

Probation of Offenders Act, 1958

Petitioner for commission of offences under Sections

3231/3412/3253/344 I.P.C. and directed him to

undergo S.I. for a period of six months for the

offence punishable under Section 3231 and S.I. for a

period of fifteen days for the offence under Section

3412 of I.P.C and S.I. for two years and fine of

Rs.10,000/- for offence punishable under Section

3253 of I.P.C. and defaults sentence of two months

of S.I. in the event of default in payment of the fine

amount, with a further direction that the sentences

shall run concurrently.

4. The plea of the defense was of complete

denial and of false implication.

5. To fortify the allegations, the prosecution

examined 13 witnesses, of whom P.W.1, the

informant, P.Ws.2, 4, and 6, the injured, P.W.12,

the Medical Officer, and P.W.13, the I.O., are of

significance. P.Ws.3, 9, 10, and 11 are the

independent witnesses, and P.Ws.7 and 8 are the

seizure witnesses. Several documents were adduced

on behalf of the prosecution and marked as Exts. 1

to 9/1.

Neither oral nor documentary evidence was

adduced on behalf of the defence.

6. Considering the evidence and materials on

record, and taking into account the injury suffered

by P.W.2 and the medical evidence on record, the

learned Trial Court convicted the Petitioner, inter

alia, for commission of the offences under Sections

3412 and 3253 of I.P.C. and directed him to undergo

the highest sentence imposed, which was on

account of the conviction under Section 3253 of

I.P.C., and the Petitioner was directed to undergo

S.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-,

as noted above.

7. Assailing such conviction and imposition of

sentence, the Petitioner preferred an appeal

numbered as Criminal Appeal No.15 of 2025. The

learned Appellate Court, by its order dated

16.01.2026, on re-appreciation of the evidence on

record vis-à-vis the findings of the learned Trial

Court, did not find any infirmity in the judgment of

the learned Trial Court and dismissed the appeal

and affirmed the order of conviction and sentence,

which is the subject matter of challenge in this

revision, as noted.

8. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits

that the appreciation of evidence is perverse so as

to warrant interference by this Court in exercise of

its revisional jurisdiction. Per contra, it is submitted

by the learned Public Prosecutor that, keeping in

view the scope of exercise of revisional powers by

this Court, there being no patent error or perversity

in the appreciation of evidence on record, in arriving

at the judgment as well as the sentence, as

imposed, the revision is liable to be dismissed.

9. On going through the order of the learned

Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court, and

assessing the same to evaluate the plea of the

learned counsel for the Petitioner that the impugned

orders of the learned Trial Court as well as the

Appellate Court suffer from patent perversity, this

Court is of the considered view that the learned Trial

Court, taking into account the evidence of the

injured as well as the medical report and the

evidence of other witnesses, has arrived at a just

conclusion in convicting the Petitioner for

commission of offences under Sections 3412 and

3253 of the I.P.C. and imposing sentence thereunder

directing him to undergo S.I. for a period of two

years inter alia under Section 3253 I.P.C.(Highest

punishment) and there is no impropriety in the

exercise of Appellate jurisdiction both relating to

conviction and sentence. Accordingly, the conviction

and sentence are hereby affirmed.

10. It is submitted by the learned counsel for

the Petitioner that the incident in question took

place on 21.09.2005 and that the Petitioner is a first

offender. Hence, he may be granted the benefit of

the P.O. Act7.

11. Learned counsel for the State opposes

such prayer.

12. During the pendency of the appeal, a

report was called for regarding the present health

condition of the injured P.W.2 and the antecedents

of the present Petitioner. The instructions received

from the concerned IIC and taken on record by this

Court indicate that the injured is presently in good

health and leading a normal life, and that the

Petitioner does not have any criminal proclivity.

13. In light of the judgment of the Apex Court

in the case of Chellammal v. State represented by

the Inspector of Police8, and while not interfering

with the conviction, as imposed, this Court is of the

view that the Petitioner is not, ex facie, disentitled

from seeking release under Section 49 of the P.O. Act7

read with Section 11 thereof. Accordingly, this Court

Chellammal v. State represented by the Inspector of Police, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 870

4. Power of court to release certain offenders on probation of good conduct.-- (1) When any person is found guilty of having committed an offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the court by which the person is found guilty is of opinion that, having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, it is expedient to release him on probation of good conduct, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the court may, instead of sentencing him at once to any punishment, direct that he be released on his entering into a bond, with or without sureties, to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period, not exceeding three years, as the court may direct, and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour:

Provided that the court shall not direct such release of an offender unless it is satisfied that the offender or his surety, if any, has a fixed place of abode or regular occupation in the place over which the court exercises jurisdiction or in which the offender is likely to live during the period for which he enters into the bond.

(2) Before making any order under sub-section (1), the court shall take into consideration the report, if any, of the probation officer concerned in relation to the case.

(3) When an order under sub-section (1) is made, the court may, if it is of opinion that in the interests of the offender and of the public it is expedient so to do, in addition pass a supervision order directing that the offender shall remain under the supervision of a probation officer named in the order during such period, not being less than one year, as may be specified therein, and may in such supervision order impose such conditions as it deems necessary for the due supervision of the offender. (4) The court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall require the offender, before he is released, to enter into a bond, with or without sureties, to observe the conditions specified in such order and such additional conditions with respect to residence, abstention from intoxicants or any other matter as the court may, having regard to the particular circumstances, consider fit to impose for preventing a repetition of the same offence or a commission of other offences by the offender. (5) The court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall explain to the offender the terms and conditions of the order and shall forthwith furnish one copy of the supervision order to each of the offenders, the sureties, if any, and the probation officer concerned.

is inclined to extend the benefit of the P.O. Act7 to

the Petitioner and directs that the Petitioner be

released on probation under Sections 44 read with

Section 1110 of the P.O. Act7, on such terms and

conditions as may be settled by the learned Trial

Court.

It is apt to note that Section 11 of the P.O. Act

deals with the power of Court in extending the

11. Courts competent to make order under this Act, appeal and revision and powers of Courts in appeal and revision.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code or any other law, an order under this Act, may be made by any Court empowered to try and sentence the offender to imprisonment and also by the High Court or any other Court when the case comes before it on appeal or in revision. (2)Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, where an order under section 3 or section 4 is made by any Court trying the offender (other than a High Court), an appeal shall lie to the Court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the sentences of the former Court.

(3)In any case where any person under twenty-one years of age is found guilty of having committed an offence and the Court by which he is found guilty declines to deal with him under section 3 or section 4, and passes against him any sentence of imprisonment with or without fine from which no appeal lies or is preferred, then, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code or any other law, the Court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the sentences of the former Court may, either of its own motion or on an application made to it by the convicted person or the probation officer, call for and examine the record of the case and pass such order thereon as it thinks fit.

(4)When an order has been made under section 3 or section 4 in respect of an offender, the Appellate Court or the High Court in the exercise of its power of revision may set aside such order and in lieu thereof pass sentence on such offender according to law:

Provided that the Appellate Court or the High Court in revision shall not inflict a greater punishment than might have been inflicted by the Court by which the offender was found guilty.

benefit of P.O. Act7 at the stage of Appeal and

Revision.

14. Additionally, It is further directed that the

Petitioner shall be liable to deposit compensation of

Rs.10,000/- before the learned Trial Court within a

period of 6 months, failing which, the same shall

entail action to be taken in accordance with

procedure laid down under Section 511 of the P.O.

Act7.

In the event of deposit of such

compensation, the same shall be released in favour

of the injured upon proper identification. The

learned DLSA is requested to facilitate the same.

5. Power of court to require released offenders to pay compensation and costs.-- (1) The court directing the release of an offender under Section 3 or Section 4, may, if it thinks fit, make at the same time a further order directing him to pay--

(a) such compensation as the court thinks reasonable for loss or injury caused to any person by the commission of the offence; and

(b) such costs of the proceedings as the court thinks reasonable. (2) The amount ordered to be paid under sub-section (1) may be recovered as a fine in accordance with the provisions of Sections 386 and 387 of the Code.

(3) A civil court trying any suit, arising out of the same matter for which the offender is prosecuted, shall take into account any amount paid or recovered as compensation - under sub-section (1) in awarding damages.

15. In this context, it is apt to note that, so far

as Section 5(2)11 of the P.O. Act7 is concerned, in the

event of default in payment of the amount ordered

under Section 5(1)11 of the said Act, the amount

shall be recovered as a fine in accordance with the

provisions of Sections 38612/38713 of the Code.

16. It is further clarified that the "Code" herein

refers to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898,

which corresponds to Sections 46112 /46213 of BNSS

461. Warrant for levy of fine.--(1) When an offender has been sentenced to pay a fine, but no such payment has been made, the Court passing the sentence may take action for the recovery of the fine in either or both of the following ways, that is to say, it may--

(a) issue a warrant for the levy of the amount by attachment and sale of any movable property belonging to the offender;

(b) issue a warrant to the Collector of the district, authorising him to realise the amount as arrears of land revenue from the movable or immovable property, or both, of the defaulter:

Provided that, if the sentence directs that in default of payment of the fine, the offender shall be imprisoned, and if such offender has undergone the whole of such imprisonment in default, no Court shall issue such warrant unless, for special reasons to be recorded in writing, it considers it necessary so to do, or unless it has made an order for the payment of expenses or compensation out of the fine under Section 395. (2) The State Government may make rules regulating the manner in which warrants under clause (a) of sub-section (1) are to be executed, and for the summary determination of any claims made by any person other than the offender in respect of any property attached in execution of such warrant. (3) Where the Court issues a warrant to the Collector under clause (b) of sub-section (1), the Collector shall realise the amount in accordance with the law relating to recovery of arrears of land revenue, as if such warrant were a certificate issued under such law:

Provided that no such warrant shall be executed by the arrest or detention in prison of the offender.

Corresponding Law: S. 421 of Act 2 of 1974: S. 386 of Act V of 1898.

2023 (Sections 42112 and 42213 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973).

17. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision, along

with I.As stand disposed of.

18. The bail bond(s) stand cancelled and the

sureties are discharged.

(V. Narasingh) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 20th March, 2026/Jina

Location: High Court of Orissa

462. Effect of such warrant.--A warrant issued under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 461 by any Court may be executed within the local jurisdiction of such Court, and it shall authorise the attachment and sale of any such property outside such jurisdiction, when it is endorsed by the District Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction such property is found. Corresponding Law: S. 422 of Act 2 of 1974: S. 387 of Act V of 1898.