BIJAYA KUMAR MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) has been filed for quashing the cognizance taken against the petitioners for offences under sections 323/380/446, I.P.C. Mr. Mohapatra is not able to satisfy me that on perusal of the complaint petition, the ingredients of the offences have not been made out. He, however, brought to my notice some circumstances which may lead to the conclusion that assertion in the complaint involving the accused persons in the offences alleged is not acceptable. Whether the facts asserted in the complaint petition would be accepted on the basis of circumstances to be proved or explained, would be within the domain of appreciation of evidence which can be best considered by the trial court at the time of trial. THIS would not be a justifiable ground to exercise the inherent powers of the Court to quash cognizance. Accordingly, I, am not inclined to entertain this application.

(2.) MR. Mohapatra submitted that petitioner No.2 is an Advocate of Baripada. Petitioner No.1 is a Director in the Film Industry and ordinarily stays at Madras. It would be a harassment to both of them to attend the trial court on each date fixed Trial in criminal cases is not meant to harass the accused persons: