Orissa High Court
CRLMC/847/2026 of MOHAN CHARAN BEHERA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 17 August 2026
of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.847 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010126482026 Mohan Charan Behera & Ors. ..... Petitioners Represented by Adv. - Rabi Narayan Mohanty -versus- State Of Odisha & Anr. ..... Opp. Parties Represented by Adv. – J.K. Ray, A.S.C. CORAM: THE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.847 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010126482026
Mohan Charan Behera &
Ors.
.....
Petitioners
Represented by Adv. -
Rabi Narayan
Mohanty
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Anr.
.....
Opp. Parties
Represented by Adv. –
J.K. Ray, A.S.C.
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
17.08.2026 Order No.
07.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned counsel for the State. Perused the CRLMC application as well as the prayer made therein.
3. The accused-Petitioner in Balianta PS case No.258 dated 25/9/2017 which was registered for commission of offence punishable under section 294/323/427/457/506/34 of IPC read with Sec.3(1)(r) 2(va) SC &ST (POA) Act which corresponds to T.R. case No.329 of 2021 have approached this Court by filing the present application under section 528 of BNS for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding pending before the learned 3rd
Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners, at the outset, contended that initially the FIR was registered on 25/9/2017 making allegations under the aforesaid sections of IPC. He further contented that in the meantime though the trial has commenced, however, only four witnesses out of eight prosecution witnesses have been examined. He further contended that the rest four witnesses are all official witnesses and that since they are avoiding appearance before the learned trial court, the trial is getting unnecessarily delayed. He further contended that the matter is pending for trial for almost close to a decade time. Being aggrieved by such delay, the Petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding.
5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that the trial in the meantime has commenced and out of eight prosecution witnesses, four have already been examined. He further contended that steps have been taken by the prosecution to ensure that other witnesses are examined at the earliest. On such ground, learned counsel for the State contended that the prayer for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding on the ground of delay is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the present application, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed at the threshold.
6. Taking into consideration the factual background of the present case, this Court had earlier called for a report from the 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Additional Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar in T.R. case No.329 of 2021. A copy of the report was placed on record by the Registry of this
Court.
7. On perusal of the letter dated 27/7/2026, it appears that out of eight charge-sheeted witnesses, four have already been examined and that the case was posted to 10/8/2026 for examination of the rest of the witnesses.
8. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that on 10/8/2026, none of the four other witnesses appeared before the Court, and as a result of which, the trial has again been adjourned.
9. With regard to the witnesses who have not been examined in this case, this Court found from the charge-sheet that P.W. No.5- Sujit Das, Ex-IIC, Balianta PS, P.W. No.6-B.N. Mishra, Ex-ACP Zone-IV, Bhubaneswar UPD, P.W. No.7-S.K. Sinha, Ex-ACP Zone-IV, Bhubaneswar UPD, and P.W. No.8-Amarendra Panda, ACP Zone-IV, Bhubaneswar UPD are yet to be examined. All those witnesses are either current or former government employees. From the aforesaid factual scenario, it is established that the trial is being unnecessarily delayed due to non-cooperation and non- appearance of the witnesses who are mostly government employees, and the prosecution relies upon their evidence in the case. The delay in conclusion of the trial in the present case is inordinate.
10. In view of the aforesaid position, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present application by directing the learned trial court to make every endeavour and to conclude the trial expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four months. Learned counsel for the State assures this Court that necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the P.W. Nos.5 to 8,
who are either serving or former government employees, shall appear before the learned trial court.
11. 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: 18-Aug-2026 19:35:42 Signature Not Verified