SUBARNAMALA NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Barik, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, inspite of conclusion of Fake Caste Certificate case against his client, again there has been initiation of another. He submits, this is not permissible in law. He draws attention to final order dtd. 28/3/2009 in Fake Caste Certificate Case no.50 of 2008 against his client, whereby it was unanimously held that the allegation is not a fact and reasons given. He relies on judgment of the Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development reported in AIR 1995 SC 94, paragraph-11, reproduced below.

(2.) On query from Court it is ascertained that Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in sec. 300 provides that a person once acquitted is not to be tried for the same offence.

(3.) Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and prays for adjournment to obtain instruction.