SUNITA PANIGRAHI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Standing Counsel.

(2.) In this proceeding under section 482, Cr.P.C., prayer is made to quash the order dated 5.4.2017 passed in G.R. Case No.86 of 2012 corresponding to Berhampur Town P.S. Case No.13 of 2012 taking cognizance for offence under sections 468/420/120(B)/109 of IPC. Learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur has found sufficient ground to proceed against six accused persons including the present petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the charge- sheet, while describing the brief facts of the case, the identity of the accused Sunita Panigrahi is stated to be the wife of Rakesh Padhi while she claims to be the wife of Jitun Kumar Padhi against whom a proceeding under section 498(A) IPC was initiated vide G.R. Case No.7 of 2015. The whole contention of the proceeding is that, she was not the same person whose identity is described in the charge-sheet.