Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 185 (ORI)

Jyotiranjan Mohapatra v. State of Orissa

2014-03-21

S.C.PARIJA

body2014
ORDER : 21.3.2014 - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Perused the Case Diary. This application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed praying for quashing of the FIR registered as Khordha P.S. Case No. 287, dated 24.07.2008 for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act against the petitioner. The case of the prosecution is that the informant while was remaining in-charge of the Khurda Police Station, in absence of the IIC of the said Police Station, who was temporarily absent, on getting information that a huge quantity of Ganja, loaded in an ambassador car and a truck is coming from Berhampur, he proceeded to Chandi Chua Chhaka, under Khurda Police Station at 11.50 P.M. on 23.7.2008, with other three Sub-Inspectors and five constables in the official jeep, driven by the driver F.A. Khan. It is stated that at about 4 A.M., when those two vehicles were stopped at a distance, the members of the raiding party rushed towards the vehicles. On seeing the police personnel, three persons had managed to escape in the dark and two persons, who were inside the car and one, who was inside the truck were apprehended. It is alleged that those accused persons, who had been apprehended could not disclose the identity of the driver and helper of the truck but, they disclosed before the informant that the present petitioner is one of the three persons, who managed to escape from the spot. It is also alleged that beside such disclosure by them, the identity card of the present petitioner, issued by the Punjab Technical University as a student of M.B.A. was found inside the alleged car, where five packets of Ganja, weighing about 34 kg. were allegedly found. It is the case of the accused-petitioner that the present petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of the statement of the co-accused and that there is no other direct materials to implicate him. It is stated that in the meantime, two of the accused persons, namely, Umakanta Sabat and Harsit Dhally, who faced trial in T.R. Case No. 36/17 of 2008, have already been acquitted by the learned Addl. It is stated that in the meantime, two of the accused persons, namely, Umakanta Sabat and Harsit Dhally, who faced trial in T.R. Case No. 36/17 of 2008, have already been acquitted by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Khurda, vide judgment dated 05.6.2012, with the following observations: "In view of the discrepant evidence among the P.Ws., the sole evidence of complainant and the I.O. cannot be treated as cogent, trustworthy and believable. Due to certain discrepancies among the P.Ws., it remains doubtful if the alleged contraband articles had been seized from the exclusive and conscious possession of the present accused persons and due to dispute in place of seizure and time of seizure, benefit goes to the accused persons. Moreover, the prosecution fails to comply the mandatory provision under Sees. 42(2) and 52-A(2) of the N.D.P.S. Act. Due to discrepant evidence among the P.Ws. and due to certain technical defects, the accused persons are entitled to be acquitted." It is accordingly submitted that in view of the fact that two co-accused persons, who faced trial, having been acquitted, as the prosecution failed to establish its case against them beyond all reasonable doubts, no useful purpose would be served by allowing continuance of criminal proceeding against the present petitioner, especially when the chances of his ultimate convictions are bleak. Learned counsel for the State with reference to the Case Diary fairly submits that there is no other material against the present petitioner to substantiate the charge under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act. Considering the submissions made and keeping in view the fact that two other co-accused persons, who faced trial, have been acquitted as detailed above, I find no useful purpose would be served by allowing continuance of the criminal proceeding against the present petitioner, especially when the chances of his ultimate convictions are bleak. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding initiated against the petitioner in Khordha P.S. Case No. 287, dated 24.07.2008, for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act and all consequential criminal proceedings are hereby quashed. CRLMC is accordingly disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules. CRLMC disposed of.