Rankanidhi Nayak VS State of Orissa

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

S. K. SAHOO, CHITTARANJAN DASH
Rankanidhi Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
In CRA No. 193 of 1997
For the Appellant No.1:Mr. D. P. Dhal, Sr. Advocate
For the Appellant Nos.2, 3 and 4:Mr. D. Nayak, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Bini Mishra and Ms. Anwesha Mishra
For the Appellant No.5:Mr. D. Panda, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Aurobindo Mohanty Additional Standing Counsel
In CRA No. 47 of 1998
For the Appellant Nos.1 and 4:Mr. D. Nayak, Sr. Advocate Along with Ms. Bini Mishra & Ms. Anwesha Mishra
For the Respondent: Mr. Aurobindo Mohanty Additional Standing Counsel

JUDGMENT

Chittaranjan Dash, J.—These Appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 30.07.1997 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Puri in S.T. Case No.20/122 of 1995/1992 and S.T. Case No.21/246 of 1995/1995. By the said judgment, the Appellants, namely, Rankanidhi Naik, Madhaba Pradhan, Kalu @ Durjodhan Pradhan, Abhi @ Rabi Pradhan, Kishore Chandra Pradhan, Dandu Pradhan, Subal Pradhan, Goli @ Golakha Pradhan, Bidhubhusan Patnaik, Harihar Pradhan, Ladu Kishore Kar and Madhu Pradhan, were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 341/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and under Section 9(b) of the Indian Explosives Act.

2. In order to appreciate the grievance of the Appellants, it is necessary to notice how the present Appeals came to be preferred. Two separate Criminal Appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 30.07.1997 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Puri in S.T. Case No.20/122 of 1995/1992 and S.T. Case No.21/246 of 1995/1995. Criminal Appeal No.193 of 1997 has been filed by accused–Rankanidhi Nayak, Madhaba Pradhan, Dandu Pradhan, Subala Pradhan and Kalu @ Durjodhan Pradhan, whereas