KRUSHNA CHANDRA BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jyoti Prakash Patra, the learned Addl. Standing counsel for the State.

(2.) This is an application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner Krushna Chandra Behera challenging the orders dated 21.04.2006 and 25.05.2006 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji in G.R. Case No. 207 of 2002 arising out of Bangamunda P.S. Case No.61 of 2002 in directing framing of charge afresh and for de novo trial as per the direction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bolangir after inspection of the Court in the year 2005.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was working as Village Level Worker (VLW) at Bangomunda Block Office and on the First Information Report dated 20.09.2002 submitted by one Basanta Kumar Oddu, B.D.O., Bangomunda Block, Bangamunda P.S. Case No.61 of 2002 under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioner and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code on 06.08.2004. On 01.10.2004 the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji rectified the charge on the ground that the charge was defective and thereafter, the prosecution examined as many as three witnesses to prove the case against the petitioner and exhibited certain documents. Learned C.J.M., Bolangir inspected the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji in the year 2005 and found irregularities in the framing of charge and accordingly, directed the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji to frame charge afresh and to proceed with de novo trial. In pursuance of such direction, the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji on 21.04.2006 decided to proceed with the trial de novo and fixed the date for framing of charge and on 25.05.2016 the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji considering the materials available on record was of the view that there was sufficient materials to presume the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of offence under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. It is held that the alleged offence was committed in respect of two years i.e. 2001 and 2002 and in view of section 212 and section 220 of Cr.P.C., separate charge for each of the aforesaid years are to be framed and accordingly, two separate files i.e. G.R. Case No. 207 of 2002 and G.R. Case No. 207-A of 2002 for trial of the petitioner under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code in respect of the year 2001 and 2002 respectively were opened.