Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K.PATTANAIK
Sumati Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges court's order via section 482 cr.p.c. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's counsel argues against required sanction. (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. details of the alleged incident and subsequent complaint. (Para 5 , 8) |
| 4. explanation of section 197 cr.p.c. and its applicability. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 5. court's order to set aside previous ruling and proceed. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner by invoking inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has questioned the correctness, legality and judicial property of the impugned order dated 2nd December, 2013 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Narsinghpur in connection with ICC Case No.10 of 2013 for having not taken cognizance of the alleged offences instead demanding sanction in terms of Section 197 Cr.P.C. on the grounds inter alia that the same is not tenable in law and thus, liable to be set aside.
2. Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State. None appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the court below fell into serious error while calling for sanction with the conclusion that it is necessary in order to criminally prosecute opposite part
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
