THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.1736 of 2024 (In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973) Annapurna Behera & another ……. Petitioners -Versus-

State of Odisha & others ……. Opposite Parties For the Petitioner : Mr. Tusar Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. S. Nayak, Additional Standing Counsel for O.P. No.1 Mr. H.M. Dhal, Advocate for O.P. Nos.5 to 7 Mr. P.K. Samantaray, Advocate for O.P. No.3 Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate for O.P. Nos.2, 4 & 10 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Date of Hearing: 07.11.2024 & 03.03.2025 :: Date of Judgment: 05.05.2025 S.S. Mishra, J. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 15.02.2024 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Puri in S.T. No. 33 of 2018. By the impugned order, the learned Trial Court rejected the application filed by the Additional Public Prosecutor under Section 216 of Cr.P.C. seeking to add Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) to the existing charges framed against the accused persons.

2. Heard Mr. Tusar Kumar Mishra, learned Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, Mr. S. Nayak, Additional Standing Counsel for O.P. No.1-state, Mr. H.M. Dhal, learned Advocate for O.P. Nos.5 to 7, Mr. P.K. Samantaray, learned Advocate for O.P. No.3 and Mr.

S.K. Dash, learned Advocate for O.P. Nos.2, 4 & 10.

3. The prosecution case originates from an FIR lodged by one Krushna Chandra Pradhan on 08.01.2017 at Town Police Station, Puri, registered as P.S. Case No. 03 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 47 of 2017. The allegations pertain to the murder of Chandan Kumar Behera, who was attacked with sharp weapons by Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3 outside Khusi Restaurant at Katcheri Chhak, Puri. The informant, who protested, was also attacked, resulting in grievous injuries.

4. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) conducted the investigation, examined 31 witnesses, and submitted a charge sheet against multiple accused persons under Sections 324, 307, 302, 201, 120B and 34 IPC, along with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Subsequently, cognizance of the offences as mentioned above was taken by the learned S.D.J.M., Puri on 08.06.2017, and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

5. The learned Sessions Court framed charges under Sections 302/34, 307/34, 324/34, 201/34 IPC, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. However, the charge under Section 120-B IPC was not included despite being mentioned in the charge sheet.

6. The petitioners initially filed CRLMC No. 4118 of 2023 before this Court, challenging the non-inclusion of charge under Section 120-B IPC. This Court, vide order dated 13.11.2023, dismissed the petition but granted liberty to the Additional P.P. to renew the prayer upon discovery of sufficient new material.

7. Pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court, the Additional P.P. once again moved an application under Section 216 Cr.P.C. before the learned Trial Court, seeking the addition of charge under Section 120-B IPC. However, the learned Trial Court, by the impugned order dated 15.02.2024, rejected the application, holding that there was no fresh material justifying the addition of the charge. 8. The petitioners contended that the rejection of the application under Section 216 Cr.P.C. is erroneous, as the trial court failed to appreciate the legal principles governing the alteration of charges. Relying on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ananta Prakash Sinha @Ananta Sinha versus State of Hariyana and another, reported in 2016 SCC (Vol.6), of paragraph-21 & 22 and CBI versus Karimulla Osan Khan, reported in 2014 SCC (Vol.11), where courts have held that omission of a charge at the initial stage does not preclude its later addition, provided that the material on record supports such inclusion. The trial court’s refusal to entertain the prosecution’s