SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 668

S.B.SINHA
State of Orissa – Appellant
Versus
Prasamma Kumar Mohanty – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:Radha Shyam Jena, Siddharth Panda, Advocates. For the Respondents:Shibashish Misra, Advocate.

Judgment :

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The prosecution against the respondent herein was initiated in the year 1987. The Investigating Officer Bipin Behari Mahapatra was examination-in-Chief on 1.9.1999. Unfortunately, on that date he could not be cross examined as respondent herein had filed two Criminal Miscellaneous Applications before the High Court although the learned Special Judge proceeded on the basis that the cross examination would be treated to have been declined. He was also present in Court on 15.1.2003 and 7.8.2003. By an Order dated 7.8.2003, however, on an application filed by the defence, the said Bipin Behari Mahapatra was recalled for cross examination. The matter was adjourned to 12.9.2003 on which date he was directed to remain present.

It however, appears that although the matter for further hearing was fixed from 12.9.2003 till 18.8.2006 no prosecution witness including the said investigating officer was present in the Court. The learned Special Judge went on issuing summons for his appearance so that he could be cross examined by the defence. Only on 18.8.2006, the learned Courts attention was drawn on an end


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top