Prasanna Kumar Sahoo v. Amit Prasad Bose

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 25.09.2025 Order No.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

Learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr.S.Das, learned Standing Counsel for Vigilance department. Perused the CRLMC application as well as the prayer made therein.

By filing the present CRLMC application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Petitioner seeks to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the entire proceeding in V.G.R. No.2/16 pending in the court of the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar which corresponds to Vigilance P.S.Case No.2 dated 11.01.2016 for alleged commission of offence under section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the P.C.Act.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the aforesaid Vigilance F.I.R. was lodged Page 1 of 3. making allegation against the Petitioner for misappropriation of public money to the tune of Rs.6,18,915/- by executing sub- standard work i.e. excavation of new pond in village Giridipali in the district of Nayagarh. He further submitted that in the meantime investigation has been concluded and due to insufficient evidence FRT has been submitted. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that although FRT was submitted on 31.12.2019, however the same has not been taken up for consideration by the learned trial court, as a result of which the Petitioner is suffering.

Learned Standing Counsel for Vigilance department on instruction from the Inspector, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar dated

10.03.2025 submitted before this Court that after completion of investigation FRT has been submitted on 31.12.2019 due to insufficient of evidence and as such FRT is pending before the Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar for acceptance. He further contended that the matter has been posted for appearance of the complainant/informant for filing of protest petition.

In reply to the aforesaid contention of the learned Standing Counsel for Vigilance Department, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that although notice has been made sufficient on the complainant/informant, however no protest petition has been filed as of now and several adjournments have been granted liberally by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar.

In view of the aforesaid position, this Court grants liberty to the Petitioner to approach the learned Special Judge, Page 2 of 3. Vigilance, Bhubaneswar along with a copy of this order. In such eventuality, learned Special Judge shall consider the same keeping in view the FRT submitted due to insufficient evidence within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

With the aforesaid observation, the CRLMC stands disposed of. RKS ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Page 3 of 3. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RAMESH KUMAR SINGH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 26-Sep-2025 13:46:21