SUMANTA BEHURA @ LITA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner Sumanta Behura @ Lita challenging the impugned order dated 4.11.2003 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar in G.R. Case No.2610 of 2003 in taking cognizance of offences under sections 419/420/120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report lodged by one Krushna Chandra Pradhan, Chairman, Admission Sub-Committee, J.E.E. (E & M)-2000 before the Inspector in-charge, Kharavela Nagar Police Station, in short, is that a candidate namely Sudhakar Dash with General Merit Rank No. 2199 came on 12th August, 2000 to the counseling desk. On interrogation, he admitted that he brought bank draft for Rs. 25,000/- which was given to him by an unknown person who posed to be his brother. The said candidate further disclosed that the accompanying person had advised him to tell that he was his brother and he would take care of all other things, if he opts for Computer Science and Engineering (payment seat) in ITER, Bhubaneswar. The said candidate alleged to have admitted that the accompanying person was completely unknown to him and on realizing his mistake, the candidate refused to take admission. A copy of the written complaint received from the said candidate was enclosed with the FIR and it is further alleged in the FIR that a racket is working for seat blocking for the purpose of depriving meritorious students.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the co-accused persons namely Manoj Ranjan Nayak, Nihar Ranjan Nayak and Manas Kumar Mallick approached this Court in an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. vide CRLMC No.2688 of 2003 challenging the very same impugned order and this Court vide judgment and order dated 9.3.2004 has been pleased to quash the order taking cognizance (Manoj Ranjan Nayak - Vrs.- State of Orissa, 2004 27 OCR 857. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is absolutely no material available on record against the petitioner so as to constitute the ingredients of offences under which the charge sheet has been placed and the petitioner stands on a better footing than the co-accused persons who approached this Court in CRLMC No.2688 of 2003 and therefore, the order of cognizance and issuance of process against the petitioner should be quashed.