Orissa High Court
CRLMC/3011/2026 of MANA@MANARANJAN BAL Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 31 August 2026
of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3011 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010665082026 Mana@Manaranjan Bal ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Parsuram Panda -versus- State Of Odisha & Anr. ..... Opp. Parties Represented by Adv. – D.K. Sahoo, A.G.A. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.3011 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010665082026
Mana@Manaranjan Bal
.....
Petitioner
Represented by Adv.
- Parsuram Panda
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Anr.
.....
Opp. Parties
Represented by Adv. –
D.K. Sahoo, A.G.A.
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
31.08.2026 Order No.
01.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for State-Opposite Party. Perused the CRLMC application as well as the prayer made therein.
3. By filing the present application, the accused-Petitioner in S.T. Case No.03 of 2025, now pending before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Basudevpur, has approached this Court thereby challenging order dated 17.08.2026 passed on an application filed by the prosecution under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C allegedly at a belated stage to add the Medical Officers as witnesses in the present trial.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that initially on the basis of the FIR lodged at Kasia Marine P.S No.124 dated 30.12.2023, a case has been registered under Section
341, 307, 325, 324, 379, 120-B, 34 of the IPC. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR, the abovenoted S.T Case number came into existence. He further submitted that in the S.T Case, charge has been framed and the trial is continuing. It was also brought to the notice of the Court that in the meantime five prosecution witnesses have already been examined. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that at this belated stage, an application was moved on behalf of the prosecution to add the Medical Officers, who had examined the injured, as witnesses in the trial. Such application was allowed by virtue of impugned order dated 17.08.2026. Being aggrieved by the order dated 17.08.2026 at Annexure-1, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present application.
5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, supported order dated 17.08.2026 and submitted before this Court that the learned trial court has not committed any illegality in allowing the application of the prosecution to add the Medical Officers as witnesses in the trial. He further contended that initially no detail was furnished with regard to the treatment of the injured, therefore, the medical officers were not added. However, subsequently upon getting information that the injured was treated by the medical officers, such medical officers have been added as official witnesses to the trial. It was also contended that such witnesses are relevant for arriving at a just decision in the case. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that the learned trial court which has power to add any witness at any stage of the trial has not committed any illegality in passing the impugned order. Accordingly, learned counsel for the State contended that the present application, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the parties, on a careful examination of the rival contentions, further keeping in view the provisions contained in Cr.P.C, particularly, Section 311 of the Cr.P.C, and on a careful scrutiny of the impugned order dated 17.08.2026 at Annexure-1, this Court found that the learned trial court has come to a conclusion that the medical officers were sought to be examined as witnesses from the side of the prosecution are relevant witnesses to arrive at a just decision. No doubt there is some delay in adding such medical officers as witnesses from the prosecution side and that they were not named in the charge sheet as witnesses. However, this Court is of the considered view that the Court is not devoid of power to add any witness at any point of time during the trial. Hence, this Court holds that the learned trial court has not committed any illegality in allowing the prayer of prosecution to add the medical officers as witnesses. However, since there is a delay in naming such official witnesses in the charge sheet, this Court, while disposing of the present application, directs the prosecution to pay a cost of Rs.1,000/- to the defence which shall be deposited before the learned trial court.
7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the CRLMC application stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 01-Sep-2026 14:10:13 Signature Not Verified