Orissa High Court Monthly Digest: September 2022 [Citations 130-145]

Nominal Index: Shakti Singh v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 130 Pramod Jena & Anr. v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 131 Ashok Kumar Gedi v. Jyotrimayee Behera & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 132 Ashis Kerketta & Anr. v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 133 Sanjit Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. Ranjit Mishra, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 134 Dara Singh @ Rabindra Ku. Pal & Ors. v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 135 Anugraha Narayan Pattnaik v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 136 Harekrushna Naik & Ors. v. State of Orissa, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 137 Siddhachit Roy v. Rabindra Kumar Mallick, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 138 Abhiram Chatria v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 139 Tukuna @ Tankadhar Swain v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 140 Mama @ Bidyut Prava Khuntia v. State of Orissa, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 141 Gagan Bihari Patra & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 142 M/s. Chemflo Industries Pvt. Ltd. versus M/s. KMC Construction Ltd. and Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 143 Dr. Srikant Panda v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 144 M/s. Jhar Mining Infra Private Limited versus CMD, managing Coalfields Ltd. & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 145 Cases Reported in the Month: 1. S. 172(3) CrPC | Accused Has No Right To Access Case Diary: Orissa High Court Case Title: Shakti Singh v. State of Odisha Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 130 The Orissa High Court clarified that an accused has no right to access 'case diary', as there is a strict bar under Section 172(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.'). A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sashikanta Mishra observed, "The matter therefore needs to be viewed with all seriousness by all concerned, not only by the concerned courts but also the office of the Court Sub-Inspector and the concerned Investigating Officer under whose custody the case diary is supposed to be kept. While the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that the accused is entitled to a fair trial, the same does not mean that the accused can be given an unfair advantage contrary to the provisions of the Code." 2. Orissa HC Directs Police To Escort Lawyer Who Was Allegedly Obstructed By Bar Members From Submitting Bail Bond Of Accused Case Title: Pramod Jena & Anr. v. State of Odisha & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 131 The Orissa High Court directed the Superintendent of Police, Khurda to provide necessary security/escort to a lawyer who was allegedly obstructed by Bar members of Tangi from approaching the Magistrate for submitting the bail bonds of his clients. While expressing concern over the matter, a Division Bench of Justice S. Talapatra and Justice M.S. Sahoo observed, "No right-thinking person can but express serious concern as regards such situation, whatever the reason, there may be behind such action. Liberty is most precious under our constitutional frame work and under the Rule of law, no person whatever mighty he may be, cannot be allowed to meddle with the liberty of individual. We hope good sense prevail." 3. O. 6 R. 17 CPC | Amendment To Election Petition Can't Be Permitted To Cure 'Inherent Defect' After Expiry Of Limitation Period: Orissa High Court Case Title: Ashok Kumar Gedi v. Jyotrimayee Behera & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 132 The High Court held that an amendment application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 cannot be allowed to cure some inherent defects in an election petition, changing its character and nature, after the expiry of the prescribed limitation period. A Single Bench of Justice Biswanath Rath observed, "For the opinion of this Court, the mistake appears to be inherent mistake by allowing change in the village names after election dispute period is over which will be amounting to extending filing of election dispute beyond the time stipulation prescribed in the Grama Panchayat Election Rules. Finding the election dispute involved inherent mistake and amendment being brought after 15 days restriction from filing the election dispute of this nature is impermissible in the eye of law." 4. Orissa High Court Upholds Life Sentences Of Murder Convicts Basing Upon Testimony Of 'Child Witness' Case Title: Ashis Kerketta & Anr. v. State of Odisha Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 133 The High Court affirmed the life imprisonment awarded to two murder convicts while placing reliance upon the testimony of a 'child witness'. To clarify the position of law regarding admissibility and reliability of testimony given by child witness, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Chittaranjan Dash relied on Alagupandi @ Alagupandian v. State of Tamil Nadu (2012), wherein it was observed, "There is no Rule or practice that in every case the evidence of such a witness be corroborated by other evidence before a conviction can be allowed to ...

Orissa High Court Monthly Digest: September 2022 [Citations 130-145]

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags