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

1999 Supreme(Ori) 15

S.N.PHUKAN, P.K.TRIPATHY
JOGENDRA NAHAK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.CHOUDHARY, B.K.SAHOO, BIJAN RAY, D.MAHAPATRA, H.K.PANIGRAHY, J.DAS GUPTA, S.K.Mohapatra, S.K.PADHI, S.PARIDA

P. K. TRIPATHY, J.

( 1 ) ABOVE noted two writ applications under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution and the Criminal Misc. Case under S. 439 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short 'the Code') were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) O. J. C. No. 17838 of 1997 has been filed by the four petitioners stating that on 12-8-1997 one Balaram Mohanty and his son Hrusikesh Mohanty were brutally assaulted. Balaram Mohanty succumbed to the injuries and it became a sensational political murder case of the locality. On the basis of the F. I. R. (Annexure-1) Purusottampur P. S. Case No. 100 (4) of 1997 was registered. It is stated in the writ petition that during the course of investigation several material witnesses including the petitioners were examined by the Investigating Officer, but being politically motivated and influenced, the Investigating Officer omitted to keep in record i. e. in the case diary, statements of such material witnesses. Thus, petitioners prayed for issue of a direction to the Superintendent of Police (O. P. No. 3) and the officer-in-charge-cum-Investigating Officer (O. P. No. 4) to record the statement of such material witnesses u













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