Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 695 (ORI)

Majum Bibi v. State of Odisha

2014-10-22

S.C.PARIJA

body2014
ORDER CRLMC No. 3067 of 2014 & Misc. Case No. 2166 of 2014 22.10.2014 - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., challenging the order dated 21.5.2014, passed .by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak in I.C.C. No. 18 of 2012, rejecting the petitioner's application to tag the complaint case with the G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011, arising out of the same occurrence and to try both the cases together. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner lodged a written report before the I.I.C., Purunabazar Police Station, Bhadrak, which was registered as Purunabazar P.S.Case No. 60, dated 26.8.2011 under Sections 147/148/448/323/324/379/336/427/506/149 IPC, against twenty accused persons named therein, corresponding to G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet only against five accused persons under Sections 147/148/323/336/427/149 IPC, cognizance of which was taken by the learned Magistrate. Being aggrieved by the action of the police in not filing the charge-sheet against the other fifteen accused persons named in the FIR, the petitioner filed protest petition by way of complaint, vide I.C.C. No. 18 of 2012, before the learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak, who after recording the initial statement of the petitioner (complainant) and the evidence of witnesses under Section 202 Cr. P.C., took cognizance of the offences under Sections 452/323/427/379/34 IPC and issued process against the accused persons named therein. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application before the learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak, to club the complaint i.e. I.C.C. No. 18 of 2012 with the G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011 and to try the same together, as the same arose out of the same occurrence. By the impugned order dated 21.5.2014, learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak, has rejected the said application of the petitioner, referring to the provisions of Section 210(3) Cr.P.C. and holding that the G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011 does not relate to any of the accused persons named in the complaint. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the complaint has been filed by way of protest against the other accused persons, who were not charge-sheeted by the police in G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011, learned Magistrate should have clubbed the complaint case and the G.R.Case, for the purpose of trial, in order to avoid contradictory and conflicting findings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the complaint has been filed by way of protest against the other accused persons, who were not charge-sheeted by the police in G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011, learned Magistrate should have clubbed the complaint case and the G.R.Case, for the purpose of trial, in order to avoid contradictory and conflicting findings. On a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the complaint i.e. I.C.C. No. 18 of 2012 has been filed by way of protest in respect .of the accused persons, who were not charge-sheeted by the police in G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011. Learned Magistrate has relied upon the provisions of Section 210(3) Cr.P.C., in holding that the accused persons charge-sheeted in the G.R.Case are not the same in the complaint and has accordingly rejected the application of the petitioner for clubbing both the cases together for the purpose of trial. This approach of the learned Magistrate does not appear to be proper and justified, especially when both the G.R.Case as well as the complaint filed by way of protest, arise out of the same occurrence. It is only just and proper, for the purpose of convenience to club both cases and try them together, in order to avoid any conflict in the findings. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 21.5.2014, passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak, in G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011, is set aside. Learned Magistrate is directed to club the complaint i.e. I.C.C. No. 18 of 2012 with the G.R.Case No. 1371 of 2011 and try the same together, in accordance with law. CRLMC and Misc. Case are accordingly disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules. CRLMC and Misc. Case disposed of.