Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 586 (ORI)

Prasan Srichandan v. State of Odisha

2019-09-16

S.K.SAHOO

body2019
ORDER : S.K. Sahoo, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar Hota, learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Jyoti Prakash Patra, learned Addl Standing Counsel for the State of Odisha. 2. In this application under section 482 of Cr.P.C, the petitioner Prasan Snchandan has challenged the impugned order dated 02.07.2018 and also the consequential orders dated 05.07.2018 and 09.07.2018 passed By the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in S.T. Case No. 222/149 of 2015-2017. The said case arises out of Rengali P.S. Case No. 130 of 2015. 3. It appears that the petitioner has been charge sheeted under sections 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO Act. At the time of consideration of the charge, the petitioner filed a petition under section 227 read with section 239 of Cr.P.C. before the learned trial Court for discharge, which was rejected by the learned trial Court as per order dated 26.05.2018. 4. Challenging the said order the petitioner earlier approached this Court in an application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. in CRLMC No. 1826 of 2018 and this Court vide order dated 25.06.2018 remanded the matter to the learned trial Court to rehear on the question of discharge and the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court within a period of fifteen working days along with certified copy of the order, in the event of which the learned trial Court was directed to fix a date and after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to the Special Public Prosecutor, to scrutinize the grievances and the record and to dispose of the same by a reasoned order within a period of fifteen days of the appearance. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after receipt of the certified copy of the order dated 25.06.2018 in CRLMC No. 1826 of 2018, the petitioner appeared before the learned trial Court on 05.07.2018 and his hajira was filed and his advocate also produced the certified copy of the order dated 25.06.2018. The application filed by the petitioner's counsel to recall the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner on dated 02.07.2018 was taken up on 09.07.2018 and it was rejected. The application filed by the petitioner's counsel to recall the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner on dated 02.07.2018 was taken up on 09.07.2018 and it was rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner has filed hajira and complied with the order of this Court dated 25.06.2018, the learned trial Court should have recalled the non-bailable warrant of arrest and further should have complied with the order passed by this Court in reconsidering the matter on the question of discharge afresh. It is submitted that the discharge petition has not yet been reconsidered in the light of the order dated 25.06.2018. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the proceeding. 6. In view of such submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, it is directed that the petitioner shall personally appear on the next date posted before the learned trial Court, in the event of which the learned trial Court shall fix a date with the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties for hearing on the question of discharge afresh and on that day also the petitioner shall remain present before the learned trial Court and every endeavour shall be made by the learned trial Court to dispose of the reconsideration aspect relating to question of discharge as early as possible. 7. The non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner is set aside. 8. Accordingly, the CRLMC application is disposed of.