Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CHITTARANJAN DASH
Ashok Kumar Jallan – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha (Vigilance) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of substandard work and conspiracy (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioners' defense and previous court ruling (Para 4 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. trial proceedings and conspiracy charges (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court declines to interfere with trial order (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsels for both the Parties.
3. The background facts of the case are that Petitioner No.1 is the Managing Director of M/s. Orient Constructions Private Limited, Sambalpur, and Petitioner No.2 is the Power of Attorney holder of the said company. M/s. Orient Constructions Private Limited, Sambalpur, was entrusted with the construction of the Karamdihi-Subdega-Talsera- Balisankara and Luhakera Road, extending over 37 kilometres. The Executive Engineer (R&B) Division, Sundargarh, along with the Assistant Engineer and the Junior Engineer of Rajgangpur Sub-Division and Subdega Section, were responsible for supervising the said construction work as the departmental technical officers. During the course of the construction, allegations arose regarding the execution of work being substandard in nature, whereupon an enquiry was initiated. In the course of inspection by the technical wing of the Vigilan
Criminal conspiracy charges can proceed independently, even if substantive offences are not proven, highlighting the distinct nature of conspiracy under IPC.
The court determined that a lack of evidence linking the petitioner to subsequent contracts or demonstrating substandard work precluded the continuation of the trial, establishing principles regardin....
At the stage of considering charges, the accused cannot rely on materials by way of defense, and the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be used for a mini trial.
The trial court is required to exercise its judicial mind to determine whether a prima facie case against the accused has been made out and must evaluate the materials produced by the prosecution for....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that conspiracy can be proven by circumstantial evidence, and the material on record must be evaluated to determine the existence of the ingredient....
In tender-related fraud cases, a conspiracy can be inferred from circumstantial evidence, allowing for charge framing even without direct evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that at the stage of consideration of charge, an accused cannot rely on materials by way of defense, and the power under Section 482 of the Code of....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
