SUBHRANSU SEKHAR SAMANTRAY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Standing Counsel states that he possesses the case diary. Heard both the parties and on their consent this application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') stands disposed of at the stage of admission.

(2.) Petitioner is the accused in T.R. Case No. 5/6 of 2002 arising out of G. R. Case No. 1106 of 2000. On 18-6-2002 learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khurda framed charge against the petitioner on Four Heads inter alia for the offence under Sections 493 and 417, Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C.') which is objected to by the petitioner on the ground of lack of prima facie case for the said two offences.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner argues that at the time of consented co-habitation between petitioner and the prosecutrix admittedly there was no marriage and for the purpose of co-habitation no deceitful means was used by the petitioner so as to make out a prima facie case for the offence under Section 493, I.P.C. He further argues that when there is no allegation of cheating with respect to any property therefor, the offence of cheating as defined under Section 415, I.P.C. and punishable under Section 417, I.P.C. is not made out. Accordingly, he argues that the trial Court without considering the legal requirement and the factual backing for the said two offences has mechanically framed charge and therefore the charge for the offence under Sections 493 and 417, I.P.C. are liable to be quashed. He reads out the F.I.R. in support of his argument.