BHAGYARATHI PATNAIK Vs. RAMA CHANDRA SWAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 17.12.1991 passed by the First Addl.Sessions Judge, Puri in Sessions Trial Case No.15/202 of 1989 -88 wherein except accused Jogi @ Jogendra Swain, all the other 14 accused persons were acquitted.

(2.) ALL the opp.parties along with 10 other co -accused persons were charged under Sections 147/148/302/149 of I.P.C., on the allegation that forming an unlawful assembly and being armed with deadly weapons, in prosecution of their common object, they committed murder of Raj Kishore Patnaik. Accused Rama Chandra Swain, Babuli @ Pravakar Swain, Mana @ Brundaban Swain and Ganga Martha were also separately charged under Section 302/34 of I.P.C., on the allegation that in furtherance of their common intention they committed murder of Raj Kishore Patnaik. Accused Babuli @ Pravakar Swain was further charged under Section 323 of I.P.C. on the allegation that he voluntarily caused hurt to Nilakantha Patnaik (P.W.6) and Niranjan Patnaik (P.W.15). Similarly, accused mana @ Brundaban Swain was further charged under Section 323 of I.P.C. on the allegation that he voluntarily caused hurt to Golakh Patnaik (P.W.3). In course of hearing of the Revision, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was only aggrieved with the order of acquittal of accused Rama Chandra Swain, Sankar Naik, Kailash Swain, Sudam Swain and Fakira. But on perusal of the Revision petition it is found that accused Sudam, Kailash and Fakir were not made parties therein for which no adverse order can be passed against them behind their back.

(3.) THERE is no glaring procedural defect or magnificent error in the judgment of the trial Court. It cannot also be said that the trial Court did not take the material evidence into consideration, while acquitting Rama and Sankar and all other opp.Parties. So, I do not find any reason to set aside the order of acquittal passed against Rama and Sankar and other opp.parties. Further, the alleged occurrence took place on 15.5.1985. The Opp.parties faced the ordeal of trial till 17.12.1991, when the judgment was pronounced. The present appeal is pending before this Court since 1994. So, at this belated stage it would be travesty of justice to set aside the order of acquittal passed in favour of the opp.parties and remand the case to the trial Court for fresh trial. Therefore, under such premises the Criminal Revision stands dismissed. Revision dismissed.