HRUDANANDA DEHURY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision is directed against the order dated 05.01.2008 passed by the S.D.J.M., Bolangir taking cognizance of the offence under Section 436, I.P.C. in G.R. Case No. 543 of 2006.

(2.) THE brief fact of the prosecution case is that 23.8.2006, the Sarpanch of Bandhapara Grama Panchayat reported in writing regarding setting of fire in the office of Bandhapara G.P. office on 13.8.2006 evening. According to the report of the Fire officer, the fire was intentional. The Secretary of the G.P. was present when the Fire men were trying to control the fire. But it was not intimated to the G.P. The Sarpanch also indicated in her F.I.R. that she suspected the hand of the present Petitioner, Secretary, Bandhapara Grama Panchayat behind the setting of fire; as the Secretary was avoiding to produce the relevant register and documents of the Panchayat office. A case was registered under Section 436, I.P.C. where after police recorded statements and seized some documents. Relying upon the statement of witnesses, the seized documents, report of the Fire Brigade and DFSL report, the I.O. filed final form against the present Petitioner under Section 436, I.P.C.

(3.) MR . Patnaik, learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand, drew the notice of this Court to the statement of witnesses and documents and pointed out certain circumstances, which according to him would show sufficient ground to proceed with the case. He also submitted that no illegality has been committed by the SDJM since there is a prima facie case against the present Petitioner. He further submitted that though there is no eye witness to the occurrence, the case is based upon strong circumstantial evidence. The chain is complete and motive of the Petitioner, which is a relevant factor, has been well established. In support of his contentions, he relied upon the charge -sheet, inspection report of Grama Panchayat Officer dated 23.5.2006, the Sub -Collector's letter dated 24.8.2006 and tour programme of B.D.O., statement of independent witnesses with regard to the conduct of accused to the effect that though he was present all through the occurrence, he did the presence of the accused before setting fire and also after the fire not hand over the key of the office to the Fire Brigade Officer and the statement of watchman that before the occurrence, the accused was present with a motor cycle and another vehicle was standing in front of the Panchayat Office. The statement of this witness (watchman) is also corroborated by the statement of the independent witness and the statement of the fireman that there was smell of kerosene.