JUDGMENT

J.P. DAS, J. - This common order shall dispose of the aforesaid five applications filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.,C. seeking exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this court assailing the judgment dated 03.07.2018 and the order of the said date passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No.62 of 2012.

2. All the five petitioners along with another co-accused faced trial in the aforesaid case for the offences punishable under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Sections 420/120-B of the Indian penal Code.

3. The allegation made by the prosecution in brief, was that the present applicants, excepting Sri Ashis Kumar Nayak, were officials of Orissa Rural Housing Development Corporation (in short, ‘ORHDC’). During the year 2000-2001 a financial assistance of Rs.2.5 crore was made available to HUDCO for establishing twenty building centres in coastal area of the State and the matter was entrusted to ORHDC to prepare a plan of action. One of such building was proposed to be constructed at Balipatna. One N.G.O. in the name of GRAMYA BIKAS MANCHA, of which the petitioner Asish Kumar Nayak was the Secretary, was recommended by the Collector, Cuttack to the Managing Director, ORHDC for being entrusted to construct the building centre. It was alleged that without completion of formalities and allotment of land in favour of the N.G.O., the work was executed and all the accused persons allegedly conspired to release the funds in favour of the said N.G.O. ignoring rules, regulations, circulars and guidelines applicable for disbursement and use of such financial assistance. The matter was taken up by the Vigilance and it was found out that the amount of Rs.22,32,510/- was released in favour of the N.G.O. on the basis of fabricated documents thereby causing severe loss to the State Exchequer.

4. The learned trial Court on completion of trial found all the accused persons excepting Ashis Kumar Nayak guilty of the offences punishable under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and accused Ashis Kumar Nayak was found guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code. All the accused persons were convicted accordingly. The judgment was pronounced on 03.07.2018. At the time of pronouncement of the judgment, hazira was filed only by two accused persons namely, Sanjay Mohanty and Ashik Kumar Nayak but on call only accused Sanjay Mohanty was found present. Other accused persons were absent and learned Counsel on behalf of the accused Pradeep Kumar Rout and Chitta Ranjan Mallik had filed petition under Section 317, Cr.P.C. Learned Counsel for the accused Vinod Kumar filed a petition for time and learned Counsel for the accused Pradeep Kumar Rout filed another petition seeking time for argument. Learned trial court mentioned in the order-sheet that the case was posted for judgment directing all the accused persons to remain present physically. Hence, rejecting the petition for time, the learned trial Court pronounced the judgment since one of the co-accused was present. Thereafter, he heard the accused Sanjay Mohanty on the question of sentence and awarded sentences for different offences. Simultaneously, he directed issuance of N.B.W. (A) against the absent accused persons, namely, the present petitioners.

5. In the present application, the petitioner challenged the aforesaid pronouncement of judgment and subsequent issuance of N.B.W. (A) against the petitioners with the submissions that the learned trial Court committed gross illegality in conducting the trial so also, in rejecting the petitions filed on behalf of the accused persons. It was submitted by learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners that the statements of the accused persons recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C. was no