NIRANJAN PRUSTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 18.07.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore in S.T. No. 78 of 1998 rejecting an application under Section 216 read with Section 227 Code of Criminal Procedure

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, which are relevant for the purpose of this revision, are that on 24.06.1998 charge was framed against the Petitioner under Sections 376(1)/493/417 IPC. Against the said order of framing charge, informant preferred a revision before this Court registered as Crl. Revision No. 284 of 1998 with a prayer to frame additional charge under Section 306 IPC. This Court disposed of the said revision on 25.03.2003 with the direction to modify and/or add other charges with reference to the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused persons after scanning the allegations made in the FIR as well as after perusing other connected statements, thereafter, the learned Sessions Judge by order dated 28.11.2003 was pleased to frame charge under Section 306 IPC in addition to other charges. Against that, the Petitioner preferred a revision before this Court, which was registered as CRLREV No. 971 of 2003. This Court after hearing the parties on 04.04.2007 set aside the said order of framing additional charge under Section 306 IPC with a direction that in course of trial if evidence comes up, the trial Court may exercise the jurisdiction under Section 216 Code of Criminal Procedure to frame additional charge under Section 306 IPC. Thereafter, a petition was filed by the Petitioner under Section 216 read with Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to discharge him from the offence under Section 376/493 IPC. The matter was heard on 18.07.2007 and the trial Court rejected the petition on the same day with an observation that the Petitioner filed the petition in order to delay the proceeding. Against that order, the Petitioner has preferred this revision.

(3.) MR . Behera, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, vehemently contended that this petition was filed before the trial Court in order to Linger the proceeding. Charge was framed on 24.06.1998 under Sections 376/493/419 IPC. The same was not challenged before this Court by the accused -Petitioner. Thereafter, additional charge was framed under Section 306 IPC on 28.11.2003, which was challenged in a revision and the revision was disposed of by setting aside the additional charge under Section 306 IPC. Thereafter, a petition was filed by the accused -Petitioner to discharge him from the offence under Section 376/493 IPC. Therefore, the trial Court has rightly rejected the application. There is no infirmity in the said order passed by the learned Sessions Judge on 18.07.2007 and as such the revision is liable to be dismissed in limine.