High Court Of Orissa
P. K. TRIPATHY
PRASANT KUMAR SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA - Respondent
CRI. MISC. 274 Of 1998
Decided On : 06/19/1998
205 - Criminal Procedure - The court set aside the summarily rejected application under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and remanded the matter to the lower court to hear afresh and dispose of the same in accordance with law, delivering a speaking order within a specified period.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, one of the accused persons in a criminal case, filed a petition under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was summarily rejected without assigning any reason.
Finding of the Court:
The court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the lower court to hear afresh the petitioner's petition under section 205, and to dispose of the same in accordance with law, delivering a speaking order within a specified period.
Issues: Summarily rejected application under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arbitrary non-speaking order, grounds not considered.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the summarily rejected application without assigning any reason was neither proper nor desirable, and therefore set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for a fresh hearing and a reasoned order.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the lower court to hear afresh the petitioner's petition under section 205, and to dispose of the same in accordance with law, delivering a speaking order within a specified period.
P. K. TRIPATHY, J.
( 1 )
( 2 ) IT is agreed upon by both the parties that this matter may be disposed of at this stage of hearing on admission.
( 3 ) PETITIONER is one of the accused persons in G. R. Case No. 2 of 1997 of the Court of S. D. J. M. , Banki. He prayed for representation u/s. 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code' ). That petition was rejected on 6-1-98 and the following order was passed,"the record is put up today on the strength of advance petiton. Advocate for R. N. Prusty files power on behalf of the accused/absconder Sri Prasanta Ku. Singh and files a petition u/s. 205, Cr. P. C. praying dispense with the personal appearance of the accused before this Court on the ground stated therein. Copy served on the A. P. P. The petition u/s. 205, Cr. P. C. hence rejected. "
( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner states that grounds advanced in support of the prayer was not at all considered and the petition was rejected u/s. 205, Cr. P. C. arbitrarily by a non-speaking order. His prayer is that learned Magistrate, should consider the grounds advanced and pass a reasoned order. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel has no objection to that submission.
( 5 ) FROM the abovequoted order it is apparent on the face of it that the application was summarily rejected without assigning any reason. Such an attitude is neither proper nor desirable. Hence the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned S. D. J. M. , Banki to hear afresh the petitioner u/s. 205, Cr. P. C. and to dispose of the same in accordance with law and delivering a speaking order within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
( 6 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner undertakes to produce a certified/authenticated copy of this order before the S. D. J. M. by 6-7-1998. In that event learned S. D. J. M. shall fix a date for hearing of the petition u/s. 205, Cr. P. C. and dispose of the same within a period of 15 days thereafter. Free copy of this order be supplied to learned Addl. Standing Counsel so as to issue appropriate instruction to the State Counsel appearing in that Court. Order accordingly.
.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.