ANUP GHOSH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the Appellants as well as the learned counsel for the State-Respondent No.1 and learned counsel appearing for private Respondent No.2. Perused the records as well as the impugned order dtd. 24/1/2024.

(2.) On perusal of the record, it appears that the present appeal has been preferred under Sec. 14-A of the S.C. & S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, challenging the order dtd. 24/1/2024 passed by the learned Special Judge ( S.C./S.T.), Balasore in I.C.C.Case No.31 of 2022 whereby the application of the Petitioner filed under Sec. 205 of the Cr.P.C, for dispensing with his personal appearance, was rejected.

(3.) Learned counsel for the Appellants at the outset submitted that the present appeal arises out of a complaint case. He further contended that the Appellants are public servants and working with the electric distribution licensee, TP Northern Odisha Distribution Ltd. (TPNODL). He further submitted that since they are involved in the aforesaid Public Utility Company, their presence is required to ensure supply of electricity uninterruptedly. However, due to their implication in the present case, they are required to attend the court every now and then, which is causing a great deal of difficulties for the Appellants in attending their official work. Learned counsel for the Appellants further submitted that the Appellants are ready and willing to cooperate with an early conclusion of trial and appear before the trial court on the relevant dates.