ASHOK KUMAR MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Section 482. Cr. P.C. petitioner prays to quash the order of cognizance passed against him in G.R. Case No. 152 of 1998 which, as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner, has been wrongly typed as G.R. Case No. 154 of 1998 in paragraph I, of the application under Section 482. Cr. P.C. That G.R. case is pending in the Court of S.D.J.M. Dhenkanal. That case has been registered and cognizance has been taken for the offences under Sections 279/304-A. I.P.C.

(2.) There is no dispute at the Bar that on 16/3/1998 at about 6.15 P.M. there was an accident between a jeep bearing Registration No. OR-06-A0414. on the National Highway (N.H. 42), as a result of which the driver and the pillion rider of the scooter suffered death, one instantaneously and the other a short time thereafter. It is also not dispute at the Bar that the aforesaid jeep belongs to the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department (in short, RWSS) and was under the custody of the petitioner as the Assistant Engineer of Kamakshyanagar, though the owner as per the record is the Executive Engineer of the said department. It is also not disputed at the Bar that one Maheswar Patra by the time of accident was the driver of that Government jeep. Such facts are noted and mentioned in the report of the M.V.I. as well as in the case diary.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that the Inspector-in-charge of Dhenkanal Town P.S. for no reason explained on record took over charge of the investigation from the original Investigating Officer, made out a Case to describe the petitioner as the driver of the Jeep. at the time of the accident and submitted the charge sheet accordingly though there does not exist a prima facie Case for the aforesaid offences against him. His contention is that the above named driver of the vehicle was driving that jeep on the date and at the time of accident and he absconded from the spot but no effort was made by the concerned I.I.C. either to trace or examine him before submission of the Final Form in the aforesaid manner. Petitioner has further stated and has also filed additional affidavit that because of absconding of the above named driver from the time of the aforesaid accident from the office of the Executive Engineer notice was issued to him on 26-3-1998 and also news item was, published in the daily Dharitri calling upon him to report in the office and because of such non-appearance he was put under suspension and that has been challenged by the said driver in the Orissa State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1461 (C) of 2001. So far as issue of notice to the said driver about his order of suspension and pendency of the original application, learned counsel for the State does not dispute.