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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 2164

ORISSA HIGH COURT
R.K. Pattanayak, J
Anil Singh Samantaray & …. Petitioners others – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha & another …. Opposite Parties – Respondent
C.T. Case No.882 of 2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. R. Mohapatra
For the Respondents: Mr. P.K. Sahoo

The court upheld the condonation of delay in filing revisions concerning cognizance of a criminal offence.

Headnote:The court considered an application for condonation of delay filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to challenge the order of cognizance for an offence under Section 307 I.P.C. The court accepted the explanation for delay and ordered its condonation in the interest of justice. The petitioners argued that the order of cognizance was erroneous as no offence under Section 307 I.P.C. was made out. The court directed the State to collect relevant documents and scheduled the matter for further orders.

ORDER

01.08.2025 Order No. I.A. No.651 of 2025

01. 1. Heard.

2. Instant I.A. is filed by the petitioners under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing of the revision on the grounds stated therein.

3. Since, the order of cognizance is challenged by the petitioners with reference to the offence under Section 307 I.P.C., the Court, considering the submission of Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners and accepting the explanation offered, is inclined to condone the delay in the interest of justice.

4. Accordingly, it is ordered.

5. In the result, the I.A. stands disposed of with the delay being condoned.

02. 1. Heard Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. Instant revision is filed by the petitioners assailing the order of cognizance dated 25th March, 2025 as at Annexure-1 on the grounds stated therein.

3. Referring to the F.I.R. as at Annexure-2 and the copy of the chargesheet at Annexure-3, it is submitted by Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners that no any offence under Section 307 of I.P.C. is made out, however, learned Court below has taken cognizance of the said offence vide Annexure-1. To consider and appreciate of the contention of Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners with reference to Annexure-2 in particular, the Court is inclined to direct the State to collect the relevant documents filed along with the chargesheet dated 24th March, 2025 including the Medical Examination Report, if the informant, namely, opposite party No.2 has been examined on police requisition for further orders on the date fixed.

4. Notice to opposite party No.2 is dispensed with for the time being.

5. List on 20th August, 2025 for final orders.

I.A. No.619 of 2025

02. 1. Heard.

2. Instant I.A. is filed by the petitioners for stay of further proceeding pending before the learned Court below in connection with C.T. Case No.882 of 2023.

3. Considering the nature of allegations made to reveal from Annexure-2 and since the chargesheet is for one of the offences under Section 307 I.P.C. being filed, this Court, as an interim measure, directs learned J.M.F.C.-I, Bhubaneswar to defer the inquiry in C.T. Case No.882 of 2023 to any future date later to 20th August, 2025.

4. List on the date fixed for further orders.

5. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.

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 Back to top