PURNA CHANDRA BISWAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THIS revision has been filed challenging the order of framing charge by learned C.J.M. -cum -Asst. Sessions Judge, Sonepur in Sessions Case No. 113/3 of 2001. It appears from the impugned order that charge for the offence under Sections 313/114, IPC has been framed. Petitioner is one of the accused persons in the said Sessions Case.

(3.) IT appears from the allegation made in the FIR and the statement of the informant Gahaki Biswal that with the assurance of marriage, the co -accused Japa @ Jubaraj Biswal cohabitated with the informant and made her pregnant. However, he avoided to marry the informant. When the pregnancy became six months old, as alleged, said accused Japa took the informant to Bargarh and in Behera Nursing Home got the child aborted by terminating the pregnancy and in that connection the present Petitioner, i.e., accused Purna helped him and thereby committed the offence of an abettor as punishable under Section 114 IPC. That is the substance of the allegation, on the basis of which, on 17.6.2002 learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Sonepur framed charge. Since the allegations made in the FIR and the statement for the offences under Sections 313 & 114, IPC occurred at Bargarh, learned Asst. Sessions Judge should have considered the provision in Chapter XIII, Code of Criminal Procedure about his jurisdiction to try the case. Admittedly, that aspect has not been considered by the trial Court. It is not expected of an officer in the rank of Chief Judicial Magistrate having been invested with the power of Assistant Sessions Judge to commit such legal blunder, as a result of which ultimately the victim may render without any legal remedy because of trial in a Court having no jurisdiction. If learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Sonepur considers that any part of the occurrence constituting the offence was committed within his local jurisdiction, then charge for such offence should have been framed alongwith the offences under Sections 313/114, IPC. That having not been done, prima facie it appears that the Asst. Sessions Judge, Sonepur has no jurisdiction to try the case.