AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. S. Mishra, J
Heard.
The petitioners have filed this petition under Section-482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 10.11.2022 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Jharsuguda in C.T. Case No.3245 of 2020 whereby their application under Section-205 Cr.P.C. has been turned down.
Mr. Milan Kanungo, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that so far as the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 are concerned, they are senior citizens and they are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the opposite party no.2. Therefore, their presence could have been dispensed with. He further submits that the prime reason of moving an application under Section-205 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners is that the father of the opposite party no.2 is influential in the locality and they have a genuine threat to their life and liberty for appearing in the Court below. Both the facts have not been taken into consideration by the learned Court below while rejecting their application.
Taking into consideration the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that in so far as the petitioner Nos.1, 2 & 4 are concerned, they can very well appear before the learned Court below through the Video Conferencing mode. So far as the other petitioners are concerned, there is no reason why they should not appear in the Court below only on the ground that they have threat perception. If they have threat perception, they may move appropriate application before the learned Court below and the Court below is directed to deal with the application filed by the petitioners on its own merit.
However, it is made clear that as and when the learned Court below directs the parties to appear before the Court in person, they have to appear in person before the Court below.
The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
…………………………