DR. SIDHARTHA PATRA Vs. REPUBLIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure. has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.9.2001 passed by learned Addl. C.J.M. cum -Spl. C.J.M. (CBI), Bhubaneswar in SPE No. 3 of 2000 taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 120B, 109, 201, 328, 342, 354, 366, 506, 509, 376/ 511, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE case of the Petitioner is that he was not named in the FIR nor any allegation was made against him by either the alleged victim Harapriya Barik or by any other person to the effect that he was instrumental in inducing Harapriya Barik to accompany Smt. Pravasini Kar to Bhubaneswar or to have participated in - the alleged molestation or attempt to rape. In view of such nature of material available on record, there was no reason for the investigating agency to submit a chargesheet against the Petitioner and the learned CBI Judge also without application of mind has mechanically taken cognizance of the offences.

(3.) MR . S.K. Padhi, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the CBI, on the other hand, referring to the case diary, chargesheet and statement of the victim Harapriya Barik submitted that there are enough materials on record to indicate that the Petitioner was a party to the conspiracy which led to the occurrence that took place in Bhubaneswar and prima facie materials being available in this regard the Court should not interfere with the order taking cognizance.