SANTOSH KUMAR RAY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure the Petitioner has sought to challenge the order dated 14.10.2009 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Titilagarh in S.C. No. 71-B/30/11 of 2002-04-09 rejecting the Petitioner filed by the State-Opp. Party No. 1 under Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure to issue summons against Sachidananda Ghose, Subrat Ghose and Shyamali Ghose.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that he does not press this application in so far as Shyamali Ghose is concerned and therefore, this application is confined to Sachidananda Ghose and Subrat Ghose.

(3.) On perusal of the impugned order and the averments made in this application, it appears that on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged by the Petitioner, Titilagarh P.S. Case No. 1 of 2001 was registered under Sections 498A, 304-B/34 IPC against one Subhasis Ghose and Ors. . After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against all the accused persons. Thereafter, Opp. Parties 3 and 4 filed an application before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Titilagarh for discharge and the said application was allowed by the order dated 13.12.2002. In the said order it was noted that the learned Addl. Special P.P appearing for the prosecution on special appointment conceded to the submissions made on behalf of the accused persons. It is stated that on the basis of the materials collected during investigation, the investigating agency ought to have submitted charge sheet only against Subhasis Ghose and it should not have charge-sheeted the. other two accused persons, as in fact there is absolutely no material against them. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge came to a conclusion that there is no prima facie material to frame charge against accused Subrat Ghosh and Sachidanan'da Ghose and therefore, they were discharged. Being aggrieved by the said order of discharge, the Petitioner/informant had approached this Court in CRLMC No. 2411 of 2003. While this Court refused to interfere with the matter it observed that, at the stage of trial if any specific evidence-is brought on record, then the prosecution is at liberty to move an application under Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure and in the event of filing of such an application, the trial Court to consider the same "strictly in accordance with law".