AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Savitri Ratho, J
1.This Criminal Revision has been filed challenging the judgment dated 05.08.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Jeypore in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 2006 / Criminal Appeal No. 76/05 of Sessions Judge confirming the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 368 of IPC and sentence to undergo R.I. for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- in default of payment to undergo S.I. for a further period of six months vide judgment dated 01.07.2005 passed by the learned C.J.M.-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Criminal Trial No. 10 of 2004/C.T. No. 65/04 of S.J.
Mr. P.K. Panda, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Arijeet Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for an adjournment.
The matter has been listed on 27.02.2024 and then on 15.04.2024 granting time to the learned counsel for the petitioner to obtain instructions and to come prepared with a date chart and notes of submissions
As date chart has not been prepared, I find no reason to adjourn the case and I deem it proper to peruse the impugned judgments and the depositions of the witnesses.
The prosecution case in brief is that on 06.06.1997 at about 7 A.M. the victim had been entrusted to go to the groom’s party in the house of her father at village Doraguda for the purpose of her marriage with one Prafulla Gatan of village Chikima. On the same day, the bride’s party and the groom’s party proceeded in a vehicle to village Chikima. On the way near the bridge of river Kukadaguda, late Kasinath Singarbi along with his associates armed with Barcha, Kati, Tangi, bow and arrow etc. restrained the jeep and after extending threats kidnapped the victim. She was dragged and assaulted by Kasinath Singarbi and his associates. An F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the victim. During investigation, it was found that the present petitioner along with said Kasinath Singarbi and others had kidnapped the victim in order to compel her to marry Kasinath Singarbi. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the present petitioner and Kasinath Singarbi. Due to death of Kasinath Singarbi, case against him abated on 26.02.2004 and the petitioner faced trial.
The plea of the petitioner in the trial was one of complete denial.
The prosecution has examined 7 witnesses to prove its case. P.W.1-Loknath Dora is the informant, P.W.2 is the victim, P.W.3-Balaram Dora is the cousin-brother of P.W.2, P.W.6-Kamlu Dalapati is the grand-father of P.W.2, P.W.4-Sadasiba Sukri and P.W.7-Pabitra Kumar Mallik are the witnesses to seizure, P.W.5-Naina Pradhani is an independent witness to the occurrence and P.W.8-Gobardhan Naik is one of the I.Os. The defence did not examine any witness.
In order to give Mr. P.K. Panda, learned counsel to another chance to make his submission in the Criminal Revision, list this matter on 03.05.2024 for further hearing.
It is made clear that further adjournment shall not be granted.
...……………………………