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

A.K.MOHAPATRA
Smrutikant Rath – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Mr. S. Panda, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. M.K. Mohanty, A.S.C.

ORDER

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. The present criminal appeal is being taken up for hearing in question of the maintainability.

3. A report attached to the criminal appeal dated 02.12.2021 by the Stamp Reporter reveals that this criminal appeal files under Section 14-A(2) of S.C. and S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989 may not lie to the Hon’ble Court as impugned order of taking cognizance has been passed on 12.04.2021.

4. Heard Mr. S. Panda, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. M.K. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing for the State.

5. Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the present criminal appeal against the order dated 12.04.2021 passed in C.T. Case No.144 of 2020 by the learned Presiding Officer, Special Court (SC/ST, POA Act), Cuttack taking cognizance of the offences and issuing summons for appearance is maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Section 14-A of the S.C and S.T. (PoA) Act, 1989. He further submits that S.T. (PoA) Act, 1989 being a special statute shall over ride the provisions of the Cr.P.C. in the aforesaid context. He further submits that the appellant has rightly filed the app

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