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

1982 Supreme(Ori) 104

B.K.BEHERA
KHIROD ALIAS KHIRODRA DEBATA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.Nayak, G.P.MOHAPATRA, J.M.MOHANTY, S.MISRA, S.N.Nayak

B. K. BEHERA, J.

( 1 ) ACCUSED of offences punishable under Sections 402 and 477 A of the Indian Penal Code and aggrieved by the orders dated May 5, 1982, passed in three cases against hirn by the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bargarh, framing charges in respect of the two offences under Section 240 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code), the petitioner has corne up to this Court under Section 397 read with Section 401 and under Section 482 of the Code, in the three Revisions which, with the consent of the parties, have been heard together and will be governed by this common order, after deterrnining the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that without proper application of rnind and perusing the materials and without affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner of being heard, the irnpugned orders have been passed mechanically without just and reasonable grounds. Mr. Nayak, the learned Additional Government Advocate, has raised the question of maintainability of the Revisions on the grounds that an order framing a charge against an accused person is an interlocutory order and, therefore, as provided in Section 397 (






































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