BINOD KUMAR CHOUDHURY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition was moved before this Bench on 5/7/2022. Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and had submitted, the insurance company illegally repudiated his client's claim on the truck, along with the goods, having been stolen. He submits with reference to complaint dtd. 23/4/2010 made by the transporter to Inspector-in-Charge Hirakud P.S., the truck commenced the journey from Remed Chowk at about 10:00am on 10/4/2010 but till the date of writing had not reached its destination. There was private search made but it could not be traced.

(2.) He submitted, F.I.R. was drawn up by the police station but under wrong Sec. 407/34 IPC. However, the police subsequently filed final report dtd. 31/3/2013 on the case under Sec. 379/34 IPC. On query from Court Mr. Dash submitted, at instance of co-ordinate Bench names of opposite parties 1 and 2 (State) were deleted on order dtd. 10/12/2014.

(3.) In this connection paragraph-3 from order of that day (5/7/2022) is reproduced below. 3. From the final report it is not clear as to the reason given for the report. Direction made in order dtd. 10/12/2014 regarding deletion of opposite party nos.1 and 2, is recalled. The amendment be reversed and countersigned by Court Master. Mr. Dash is requested to forthwith serve copy of the petition upon State. State is required to issue instructions for being heard on content of the final report, disclosed at page 16 of the writ petition. Mr. Khan, learned advocate appears on behalf of the insurance company. He too shall be heard on adjourned date."