Orissa High CourtCRLMC/2819/2016disposed off

Subrat Ku.Dash v. State Of Orissa

2022-11-25Dr. Justice S. Muralidhar (Cj)2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CRLMC No. 2819 of 2016 Subrat Kumar Dash and others ....

Petitioners Mr. H.N. Mohapatra, Advocate -versusState of Orissa and another ....

Opposite Parties Mr. Janmejaya Katikia, AGA for State Mr. Devashis Panda, Advocate for OP No.2

CORAM:

THE CHIEF JUSTICE Order No.

ORDER

25.11.2022 08.

1. The grievance of the Petitioners is that by the impugned order dated 18th March 2016, the learned JMFC, Tigiria has taken cognizance in C.T. Case No.694 of 2012 against the Petitioners for the offence under Section 376 IPC and that this was impermissible in law since earlier by an order dated 9th July 2013, the same J.M.F.C., Tigiria in the same case had already taken cognizance of certain offences against the Petitioners including Sections 498A/323/497/294/506/406/34 of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The contention is that once cognizance was taken earlier on 9th July 2013, the J.M.F.C., could not again have taken cognizance for the second time by the impugned order.

2. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that on the second occasion cognizance was taken of the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC on the basis of the evidence that emerged in the course of the trial. The impugned order refers to the circumstance

under which the J.M.F.C. was prima facie of the view that offence under Section 376 of IPC was also made out against the present Petitioners.

4. In that view of the matter, the Court is unable to agree that by the impugned order, the J.M.F.C., was taking cognizance for the same offence for the second time. Clearly this offence is different from the offences in respect of which cognizance was taken by the earlier order dated 9th July, 2013.

5. Consequently, the Court does not find any merit in the present petition and it is dismissed as such. The interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

6. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any view on the merits and it will be open to the Petitioners to raise all the pleas in accordance with law at the appropriate stage in the trial court. It will be open to the parties to request the trial court to expedite the trial.

(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice S.K. Guin