LAWS(ORI)-1983-12-21

NIROD CHANDRA MISRA Vs. DIJABAR SWAIN

Decided On December 07, 1983
NIROD CHANDRA MISRA Appellant
V/S
DIJABAR SWAIN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an accused in the complaint case registered as I.C.C. case No. 318 of 1981.

(2.) This revision is directed against an order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Cuttack dated 31.8.1981 by which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Issued process against the present petitioner and some others.

(3.) The opp. party Dijabara Swain lodged an F.I.R. in the Sadar Police Station, Cuttack alleging that the present petitioner along with Lingaraj Acharya, Charulata Panda, Aparna Devi and Saila came in a vehicle-and asked his wife to vacate the house. It is further alleged that Charubaila caught hold of the hand of the wife of the complainant and Lingaraj opened a bottle and threw something which however, did not fall on his wife as she closed the door and went inside. It is also alleged that one Gandharba Sahu the brother-in-law of the complainant Was stabbed on the upper portion of the left eye by the petitioner. The matter was investigated by the police who submitted a final report stating that this was a false one. The complainant thereafter initiated the above mentioned case and there upon the Chief Judicial Magistrate Cuttack passed an order for enquiry under section 202, Cr. P.C. by a judicial Magistrate, First Class, Cuttack. The enquiring Magistrate submitted his report dated 19.8.1981 in which he came to a conclusion that there is no prima facie case against the accused Sailasuta, Aparna, Sunita, Kadambari, Gobinda, Maheswar and Ashoka. He, however, concluded that there is a prima facie case against the accused Niroda (present petitioner) under section 448/324, I.P.C. and against Lingaraj and Charulata under section 352. I.P.C. The report is silent as to the accused Mukunda Hati. After receipt of the report the Chief Judicial Magistrate has passed the impugned order, the text of which is as follows: 6 31.8.1981 The report of the enquiring officer seen. Perused the petition filed by the complainant. The case is a counter case to G. R 2890 of 79. I am in agreement with the petitioners advocate. There being prima facie case against all the accused persons u/s 147 /448, 324/352/149, I.P.C Cog. taken thereunder, Issue summons to the accused persons fixing 18.9.1981 for appearance. Requisite at once