Skip to content


Hareram Satpathy and anr. Vs. Premlal Suna and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 711 of 1983
Judge
Reported in57(1984)CLT141(SC); 1984Supp(1)SCC685
ActsCode of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), (Cr.P.C) 1973 - Section 378(4)
AppellantHareram Satpathy and anr.
RespondentPremlal Suna and ors.
DispositionAppeal Allowed
Excerpt:
- [a.p. sen and; v. balakrishnan eradi, jj.] -- criminal procedure code, 1973 — section 378(4) — summary dismissal of application by high court for grant of leave under, held, not justified where brutal political murder committed by persons belonging to ruling political party — on facts, leave must be granted under section 378(4) -- we are inclined to the view that this was a case of cold-blooded brutal murder of a political opponent and the matter deserves a consideration on the merits of the case. the testimony of the three eyewitnesses bibbhu udgata, pw 1, h. nanda, pw 12 and hareram, pw 18 shows that a jeep belonging to the congress (i) party in which the accused persons were travelling was reversed and the deceased parsuram satpathy, who was a member of bhartiya..........high court, summarily dismissing an application for grant of leave under section 378(4) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973.2. although this court, as a normal rule, does not interfere with an order of this nature, we are constrained to do so as there is nothing in the order passed by the high court to indicate that the learned judges applied their mind to the evidence adduced by the prosecution. we are inclined to the view that this was a case of cold-blooded brutal murder of a political opponent and the matter deserves a consideration on the merits of the case. the testimony of the three eyewitnesses bibbhu udgata, pw 1, h. nanda, pw 12 and hareram, pw 18 shows that a jeep belonging to the congress (i) party in which the accused persons were travelling was reversed and the.....
Judgment:

A.P. Sen and; v. Balakrishnan Eradi, JJ.

1. This appeal by special leave is directed against an order dated January 12, 1982 of the Orissa High Court, summarily dismissing an application for grant of leave under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. Although this Court, as a normal rule, does not interfere with an order of this nature, we are constrained to do so as there is nothing in the order passed by the High Court to indicate that the learned Judges applied their mind to the evidence adduced by the prosecution. We are inclined to the view that this was a case of cold-blooded brutal murder of a political opponent and the matter deserves a consideration on the merits of the case. The testimony of the three eyewitnesses Bibbhu Udgata, PW 1, H. Nanda, PW 12 and Hareram, PW 18 shows that a jeep belonging to the Congress (I) Party in which the accused persons were travelling was reversed and the deceased Parsuram Satpathy, who was a member of Bhartiya Lok Dal and incharge of its youth wing, was deliberately run over in a crowded place. As a result of this the deceased met with an instantaneous death as his head got crushed under the rear wheel of the jeep. In a case of this kind where there are political undertones, it shakes the confidence of the people in our system of administration of justice if matters of such a serious nature are summarily dealt with. It creates an impression that merely because the respondents belonged to the party in power, they could get away with impunity after having committed a heinous offence out of political rivalry.

3. In all the facts and circumstances of the case we are satisfied that the facts are such which would justify the grant of leave under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. We order accordingly.

4. The result therefore is that the appeal succeeds and the order passed by the High Court is set aside. The High Court is directed to hear the appeal treating it as having been filed with leave under Section 378(4) of the Code and dispose of the same on merits in accordance with law.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //