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

2020 Supreme(Ori) 39

B.R.SARANGI
Kunja Bihari Patra – Appellant
Versus
State Of Orissa – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S. Pattanaik, Advocate, S. Mohanty, Advocate, B. Moharana, Advocate, A. Barik, Advocate, G.N. Rout, Advocate, P.K. Mohapatra, Advocate, S. Mohanty, Advocate, A. Mohapatra, Advocate
Cases Referred
A.A. Mulla, (1996) 11 SCC 606 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 305 : AIR 1997 SC 1441
Dr. Lakshman vs. State of Karnataka, (2019) AIR(SC) 5268
Inder Mohan Goswami vs. State of Uttaranchal, (2008) AIR(SC) 251
R. Viswan vs. Union of India, (1983) 3 SCC 401 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 405 : AIR 1983 SC 658
Radharaman Sahu vs. Trilochan Nanda, (1990) 70 CutLT 788
Sangeetaben Mahendrabhai Patel vs. State of Gujarat, (2012) 7 SCC 621
Union of India vs. Sunil Kumar Sarkar, (2001) 3 SCC 414 : 2001 SCC (L&S) 600 : AIR 2001 SC 1092

JUDGMENT

B.R. Sarangi, J. - The petitioner, being accused no.1 in ICC Case No.217 of 2016 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Angul, has filed this application seeking to quash order dated 17.12.2016, by which direction has been given to IIC, Angul Police Station for registration of the case and causing investigation as per the provisions contained in Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.

2. Brief facts of the case, as revealed from the complaint petition filed by opposite party no.2, as complainant before the Court below, are as follows:-

    Opposite party no.2-complainant named and styled as "M/s. Jaydurga Transport" is a proprietorship firm and the owner of heavy earth moving equipment. Petitioner-accused no.1 is the owner of "Hindustan Machinary", a sub-contractor of accused no.2, who is the contractor of Railway authority and was awarded with the contract work of doubling the railway track/earth work from Handapa to Nakchi railway line, along with other contract work. During course of business, petitioner- accused no.1, along with other accused persons, approached opposite party no.2-complainant for supply of its heavy earth moving equipment for construction of doubling railway track wo

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