DHIRENDRA KUMAR KHANDELWAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) The crux of the issue arises at present is whether against the order of rejecting petition filed for discharge by the accused and framing of charge by the learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court (OPID Court), a revision petition is maintainable or an appeal under section 13 of the OPID Act, 2011

(3.) The petitioner Dhirendra Kumar Khandelwal has challenged the impugned orders dated 05.04.2016 and 06.04.2016 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court (OPID Act), Cuttack in C.T. No.15 of 2015. By virtue of the order dated 05.04.2016, the discharge petition filed by the petitioner was rejected and vide order dated 06.04.2016 on perusal of the case record and the documents, being satisfied that there appears to be grounds for presuming the commission of offences under sections 467/ 468/ 471/ 406/ 420/ 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 and section 6 of the Odisha Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2011 (hereafter "OPID Act, 2011") is made out, framed the charges.