Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Mohan Kumar Durit – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J.
1. These matters are taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Informant-Opposite Party No.2 and learned counsel for the State in both the cases. Perused the applications which were taken up for hearing today.
3. BLAPL No.3678 of 2025 has been filed at the instance of the Petitioner for his release on bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. Similarly, the Petitioner has also approached this Court by filing an application under Section 438 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 challenging the order dated 03.02.2025 passed by the learned ADJ-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Bargarh in C.T. Case No.43 of 2024 whereby the learned ADJ-cum- Special Court under POCSO Act, Bargarh was pleased to reject the application filed by the Petitioner dated 06.01.2025 under Section 34 of the POCSO Act on the question of jurisdiction.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that since both the applications involve an identical issue, they are taken up together for hearing. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2-Informant has no objection to the same.
The trial court failed to determine the accused's age under the Juvenile Justice Act and POCSO Act, making its jurisdictional ruling invalid.
The court emphasized the necessity for complying with statutory requirements regarding age determination for minors in criminal proceedings, rendering improperly assumed jurisdiction a nullity.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of evidence, age determination, and the presumption as to certain offences under the POCSO Act in the context of a bail applica....
The court established that the determination of age and the validity of evidence must be assessed during the trial, not at the discharge stage.
Discharge of accused – At the stage of considering application for discharge court must proceed on assumption that material which has been brought on record by prosecution is true – Defence of accuse....
The court established that in cases of juvenility, the benefit of the doubt should favor the accused, and direct evidence from the victim is paramount in determining the facts.
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
