BIJAY KUMAR PANDA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment dtd. 20/2/2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack in Criminal Appeal No.142 of 2019, arising out of the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned S.D.J.M. (Sadar), Cuttack in G.R. Case No.1053 of 2010 (T.R. No.253 of 2011) is called in question by the accused-petitioners under Sec. 401 read with Sec. 397 of Cr.P.C.

(2.) Heard the respective learned counsels for the petitioners and the opposite party no.2 (Informant) and also the learned counsel appearing for the State-opposite party no.1. Perused the impugned judgment and other relevant papers on record including the judgment dtd. 15/5/2019 rendered by the learned S.D.J.M., Sadar, Cuttack.

(3.) The prosecution vide the G.R. case referred to above, was launched pursuant to the F.I.R. lodged by the present opposite party no.2, wife of the petitioner no.2, and all the petitioners being arraigned as accused in the said case, faced trial for the offences under Ss. 498-A, 406/34 of IPC. As it further appears, in course of the trial, the prosecution examined three witnesses, and the learned SDJM, Sadar, Cuttack on closing the prosecution side without examination of the other witnesses as cited in the charge-sheet including the Informant and the Investigating Officer, ultimately passed the judgment dtd. 15/5/2019 acquitting all the petitioners (accused persons) of the charges, on a finding that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case. It may be mentioned here that, in course of the proceeding, the learned trial Court directed for closure of the prosecution on the ground that despite repeated summons, the Informant did not turn up to give evidence, and the attendance of the Investigating Officer also could not be procured despite summons, and the prosecution also failed to procure attendance of the Informant (victim), Investigating Officer and the other witnesses. Being aggrieved by the acquittal judgment so rendered by the trial Court, the Informant-opposite party no.2 preferred an appeal registered as Criminal Appeal No.142 of 2019 before the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack, who vide the impugned judgment set-aside the said acquittal judgment and remitted back the case to the trial Court for a fresh trial and disposal after examining the material witnesses of the prosecution who had remained unexamined during the trial. Being aggrieved thereby, the accused-petitioners have approached this Court with the present revision petition.