The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.27250 of 2024 (An application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950) Karnath Majhi …. Petitioner -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode): For Petitioner -
Legal Reasoning
Mr. M.K. Mohapatro, Advocate. P.K. Behera, Advocate. For Opposite Parties- Mr. D. K. Sahoo, Addl. Govt. Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA Date of Hearing :03.03.2025 :: Date of Judgment :24.03.2025 A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the letter No.2042/G & M dated 04.10.2024 issued by the Addl. District Magistrate, Kalahandi under Annexure-4 and letter No.70 dated 14.10.2024 issued by the Assistant Director Soil Conservation-cum- Project Implementing Agency, Jaipatna under Anenxure-5 and to direct the opposite party Nos.3 & 4 (Addl. District Magistrate, Kalahandi & Assistant Director Soil Conservation-cum-Project Implementing Agency, W.P.(C) No.27250 of 2024 Page 1 of 5 Jaipatna respectively) to approve the proposal submitted by the Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association under Annexure-2 and to register the Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, as per the resolution of the villagers of Talgud, Gandguda, Karanjiguda & Mukhiguda, on dated 16.11.2023 they formed an Association, namely, Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association in presence of the local gentries and Government officials, wherein the executive body members of the Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association were selected, wherein the petitioner of this writ petition was selected as president of the said Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association and that resolution of the Association was sent to the Project Implementing Agency, Jaipatna (O.P.4) for its approval and the O.P.4 sent the same to the Registering Authority i.e. O.P.3 (Addl. District Magistrate, Kalahandi) and the O.P.3 vide letter No.2042/ G & M dated 04.10.2024 sent a letter to the Secretary of Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association to submit a fresh memorandum and resolution copy excluding the petitioner along with one Arjun Sagadia from the membership list of the said Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association for the registration of that Association under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 on the ground that, they (petitioner and Arjun Sagadia) are involved in criminal cases. Thereafter, the O.P.4 also vide letter No.70 dated 14.10.2024 requested the Secretary of Maa Dokribudhi W.P.(C) No.27250 of 2024 Page 2 of 5 Micro Watershed Association to select another president other than the petitioner of that Association, as a criminal case is pending against him (petitioner). For which, the petitioner challenged the said letter No.2042/G & M dated 04.10.2024 issued by the Addl. District Magistrate, Kalahandi (O.P.3) and letter No.70 dated 14.10.2024 passed by the Assistant Director Soil Conservation-cum-Project Implementing Agency, Jaipatna (O.P.4) praying for quashing the same. Because, the O.P. Nos.3 & 4 cannot debar the petitioner along with Arjun Sagadia from the membership of the Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association on the ground of pendency of criminal case under Sections 498-A, 294, 506 & 494 of the I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act against them. 3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State. 4. On the basis of the rival submissions of the learned counsels of
Decision
both the sides, the crux of the writ petition is, whether the letter Nos.2042/G & M and 70 vide Annexure-4 & 5 respectively issued by the O.P. Nos.3 & 4 debarring the petitioner and Arjun Sagadia from the membership of Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association on the ground of pendency of the criminal case against them is sustainable under law? 5. It is the settled propositions of law that, every man and accused is deemed/presumed to be innocent, unless until, he is found guilty after trial. W.P.(C) No.27250 of 2024 Page 3 of 5 Mere pendency of a criminal case against any person/accused including the petitioner cannot debar him from his membership of an Association like Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association. Because, as per law, he is presumed to be innocent, as he has not been convicted in any criminal case as yet after trial. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified by the Hon’ble Courts and Apex Court in the ratio of the following decisions:- (i) In a case between Chhotu Kumar Vrs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) reported in 2021 (2) Crimes 93 (Delhi); presumption of innocence must be maintained until the accused is found guilty. (ii) In a case between Ashraf and Ors. Vrs State of Uttarakhand and Ors. reported in 2020 (1) Crimes 493 (Uttarakhand) at Para 25, an accused is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty. (iii) In a case between Sanjay Chandra Vrs. CBI reported in 2012 (51) OCR 128 (SC) at para 14, every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty. 6. When, as per law, unless and until a person found guilty after trial by a Competent Court, he is presumed to be an innocent. 7. So, in view of the principles of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Courts and Apex Court in the ratio of the aforesaid decisions, when the petitioner has not been held guilty as yet in any criminal case after completion of trial, then at this juncture, the O.P. Nos.3 & 4 should not have debarred the petitioner from his membership of Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association as per letter Nos.2042/G & M and 70 vide W.P.(C) No.27250 of 2024 Page 4 of 5 Annexure-4 & 5 merely on the ground of an accusation against him in a criminal case under Sections 498-A, 294, 506 & 494 of the I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act in respect of a purely family private dispute between him and his wife. For which, the aforesaid letters dated 04.10.2024 & 14.10.2024 issued by the O.P. Nos.3 & 4 are not inconformity with law. The same are liable to be quashed. 8. Therefore, there is merit in the writ petition filed by the petitioner. The same is to be allowed. 9. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The letters dated 04.10.2024 & 14.10.2024 (Annexure-4 & 5) issued by the O.P. Nos.3 & 4 are quashed. The O.P. Nos.3 & 4 are directed to accept the membership and the selection of the petitioner as president of Maa Dokribudhi Micro Watershed Association through valid resolution and take steps to register that Association under the Societies Registration Act by the O.P.3 as per law. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of finally. Orissa High Court, Cuttack. 24.03.2025//Utkalika Nayak// Junior Stenographer W.P.(C) No.27250 of 2024 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 24-Mar-2025 18:44:44 (A.C. Behera), Judge. Page 5 of 5