JAJATI KESARI BISWAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question that arises for consideration in the present revision is as to whether the petitioner who has already been charge -sheeted by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar can be made to face trial for the selfsame offence before the learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir and further, as to whether learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir has necessary jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence which did not take place within his territorial jurisdiction.

(2.) MR . Panda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no part of the alleged offence occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of the learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir and in the absence of such fact, the learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir has no jurisdiction to pass any order of cognizance in the matter. In support of his contention, Mr. Panda placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Premkumar and Others v. State of Kerala, (2009) 42 OCR (SC) 550 as well as in the case of Y. Abrahamajith and Others v. Inspector of Police, Chennai and Another, (2004) 8 SCC 100 and on various provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) BASED on such F.I.R., the petitioner and his wife were apprehended by the police and produced before the learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir who passed the impugned order dated 25.11.2008 to the following effect :