HRUSHIKESH SARANGI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged legality and correctness of the order dated 5-4-1997 in Sessions Trial No. 29/10 of 1996 arising out of G.R. Case No. 101/95 of the Court of J.M.F.C., Sohella and now pending in the Court of the Asst. Sessions Judge, Padampur vide S.T. No. 29/32 of 1996.

(2.) Heard.In view of the argument advanced and the limited point which is required to be adjudicated, the fact involved in the case is not necessary to be stated.

(3.) Suffice for the purpose to note that charge sheet u/Ss. 395, 397, 109 and 400 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC' read with Ss. 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, was filed against five accused persons including the present petition. In the meantime, in Crl.Misc. Case No. 3327/95 u/S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short 'the Code') petitioner prayed to quash the cognizance order. That case was disposed of with a direction that petitioner shall raise such point at the stage of taking cognizance or framing of charge. when the matter was taken up for consideration of charge on 8-4-97 petitioner advanced contention that there is no material available in the record to connect him with the alleged crime and prayed to be discharged u/S. 227 of the Code. After perusal of the case diary and upon hearing the parties learned trial Court rejected the contention of the petitioner on the ground of existence of a prima facie case. Accordingly, charge was framed for the aforesaid offences. Learned Assistant Sessions Judge has stated that at the stage of consideration of charge, trial Court is not required to make meticulous analysis of the statement as is required to be done while considering the guilt or innocence of the accused at the conclusion of the trial and that a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner besides the co-accused persons.