The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.109 of 2024 Manoj Kumar Naik …. Petitioner Mr. S.P. Sarangi, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & others …. Opp. Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr. B.K. Ragada, Additional Government Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Decision
Order No. ORDER 21.10.2024 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner, in this petition, is assailing the order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Kuchinda in I.C.C. Case No.18 of 2022 whereby the complaint petition filed by the present petitioner against the opposite party nos.2 to 20 has been turned down. 3. The petitioner in the complaint petition has, inter alia, alleged as under: “(a). That, on the date, time of occurrence all the accused persons abused the complainant in obscene language, assaulted brutally, defamed the metal and chips worth him, removed Rs.37,000/- (Rs. thirty seven thousand) and threw away by machines, pressed the beck of the complainant in order to murder. The accused No.2 the IIC, Kuchinda P.S. as present at the spot who has instigate/encouraged other accused persons and rescued intervened to do aforesaid misdeeds, so also all the accused persons threatened the complainant to kill him i n life in future. For that the complainant is highly terrified and apprehends danger to his life. The witnesses the complainant, the witness No.3 is misdeal escort to complainant. (b) That, aforesaid misdeed of accused persons discloses a case U/s. 323,325, 304, 500, 427,834 I.P.C. It is therefore prayed that cognizance may kindly taken the accused persons be summoned to stand their and after hearing and taking all necessary evidence the accused person be punished to the law.” 4. To substantiate the aforementioned allegation, the petitioner was also recorded his statement under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., inter alia, stated as under: “2. This incident occurred on 25.04.2019 at about 8.00 p.m. on the land of complainant of front of the temple. On the said day, the complainant gathered chips and metals over his land for construction of house. My house is in front of the said disputed spot and I saw the accused persons taking away the said chips and metals towards the forest by tractor and JCB vehicle. When the complainant opposed the said act of the accused persons then the accused persons assaulted him and also threatened him with dire consequences. The complainant suffered loss for the act of the accused persons.” 5. On the basis of the aforementioned, the petitioner in the complaint petition had insisted the learned Court below for taking cognizance of offences against 19 accused persons, i.e., opposite party nos.2 to 20. The learned Court below on 11.10.2023 has passed the following order: “The case record is put up today for order in the matter of cognizance. To establish the involvement of each and every accused person in commission of the alleged offences the complainant must prove 2 the role of each of the accused persons, there are nineteen Nos. of persons shown as accused persons in this case including accused No.2 who was the then IIC of Kuchinda P.S., but in this case the compliant did not prove the role of each accused persons further the complainant has to prove that the accused No.2 has committed the alleged offences while performing of his duty which is not established by the complainant. The complainant further alleged that he has kept metals and chip0s which was taken away by the accused persons but to establish that he is the owner of the metal and chips, no documents were furnished in this regard. it is Patel, found Gopabandhu Furthermore, on perusal of the inquiry u/s-202 Cr.P.C. of witness No.2 it is found that the complainant suffered inquiry on his head and sustained financial loss but no such injury report in support of the complainant has been filed in this regard to establish the case. Again, on perusal of the final form submitted by the IIC, Kuchinda vide Final Form/Charge Sheet that, No.84 dated 26.05.2022 complainant Manoj Kumar Nayak lodged an F.I.R. against the accused persons Srikant Kumar Patel, Barik, Sanjukta Krushnachandra Barik, Prafulla Chandra Sohela, Ranjan Nayak and Khirasagar Kuanar on the same point of issue separate charge sheet has been filed vide Kuchinda PS F.F. No.156 of 22.07.2019 despite of the above facts complainant had filed this court in 18.06.2019 on the same fact in issue. Considering the above facts and circumstances the case this court is of the considered view that there is no sufficient ground to proceed against the accused U/s- 323/325/307/500/427/34 of IPC in this case. Hence, the complainant stands dismissed as per provision of U/s-203 of Cr.P.C.” the complaint petition this complaint case filed by persons alleged as 6. I have perused the copy of the complaint petition as well as the statements and other materials placed before this Court. I am in complete agreement with the learned S.D.J.M., Kuchinda, who has declined to 3 take cognizance of offences against the accused persons, i.e., opposite party nos.2 to 20, because neither the complaint petition nor the enquiry under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., discloses any case against the private respondents. No material has been brought on record to substantiate any specific allegation against the accused persons. Apart from that the observation of the learned trial Court regarding non- establishment of the ownership of the metal and chips, which was allegedly lying in the spot, cannot be doubted. Moreover no medical evidence was produced to establish any injury allegedly sustained by the petitioner. The allegation made in the complaint petition is vague as that of the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the leaned trial Court has rightly refused to take cognizance of offences against the opposite party nos.2 to 20. 7. Therefore, I find no cause to interfere with the order of the learned trial Court. 8. Accordingly, the CRLMC stands dismissed. Signature Not Verified amit Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 23-Oct-2024 18:55:22 (S.S. Mishra) Judge 4