Orissa High Court
Satya Rana And Others vs State Of Orissa on 19 August, 2025
THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRA No.73 of 1997
(In the matter of an application under Section 374 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973)
Satya Rana and others ....... Appellants
-Versus-
State of Orissa ....... Respondent
For the Appellants : Mr. S.N. Mishra-4, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. A.K. Apat, AGA
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Date of Hearing: 24.07.2025 :: Date of Judgment: 19.08.2025
S.S. Mishra, J. The present Criminal Appeal, is filed by the appellants
under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C., assailing the judgment and order dated
31.03.1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Titilagarh
in Sessions Case No. 100/24 of 1995, whereby the learned trial Court has
convicted the accused-appellant- No.1 for the offence U/s.148/452/325
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo R.I. forone year under Section 148 of IPC and R.I. for one year and to pay fine
of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for one month on each count
under Sections 452 and 325 of IPC; the appellant nos.2 and 3 have been
convicted under Sections 148/323 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo
R.I. for one year under Section 148 of IPC and R.I. for four months
under Section 323 of IPC and appellant nos.4 and 5 have been convicted
under Sections 148/323/452 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I.
for one year under Section 148 of IPC, R.I. for one year and to pay fine
of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for one month for the offence
under Section 452 of IPC and R.I. for four months under Section 323 of
IPC.
2. The prosecution case tersely stated is that on 31.01.1994 at about
4.45 P.M. in the colony of Straw Board Industries Pvt. Ltd. the accused
persons being armed with iron rod, chain, lathi etc. entered into the
colony with an object to commit murder of the employees of the
company, namely, the informant Prafulla Kumar Chand, Ramsinghasan
Tiwari, Sadhu Charan Patel and Santosh Bhoi by trespassing into the
Page 2 of 14
residence of Ranjit Mishra assaulted him and his brother Mandhata
Mishra and forcibly entered inside the residence of Ujal Chandra Giri
and assaulted him and committed theft of his watch, cash and other
articles and scolded in filthy language and threatened the employees with
bodily injury.
3. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, Titilagarh P.S. Case No.
15 dated 31.01.1994 was registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 147/148/307/452/380/506/149 of IPC, which corresponds to
G.R. Case No. 26 of 1994 After investigation, charges were framed
against the appellants for the offences, as mentioned above and they
were put to trial.
4. Heard Mr. S.N. Mishra-4, learned counsel for the appellants and
Mr. A.K. Apat, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.
5. The prosecution in order to bring home the charges examined as
many as fifteen witnesses, whereas the defence took a stand of denial
and claimed trial.
Page 3 of 14
6. P.W.1, was the informant; P.W.2 was an employee of the
company and also an eye witness to the occurrence; P.W.3 was also
another eye witness to the occurrence and seizure; P.W.4 was another
employee of the company and witness to the seizure; P.Ws. 6, 8, 9, 10,
11 and 12, the employees and ex-employees of the company were the
victim-injured persons; P.W.7 was an employee, who was a post
occurrence witness; P.Ws.13 and 15 were the two doctors, who
examined the injured persons; P.W.5 and P.W.14 were the two
Investigating Officers of the present case.
7. The learned trial Court after thorough analysis of all the evidence
on record arrived at the following conclusion:-
“18. Before parting with the judgment it may be observed that
there is no acceptable evidence that –
(1) All the 29 accused persons had taken part in the alleged
crime;
(2) all the accused persons had trespassed inside the residence
of P.Ws. 10, 11 and 12;
(3) Theft from the residence of P.Ws.10, 11 and 12 was
committed by any of the accused persons; and
(4) accused persons had intended to attempt on any one’s life.
19. From the above discussion it is to be concluded that
prosecution has been successful in establishing that on 31.1.94
at 4.45 P.M. in the staff colony of Straw Board Industries Pvt.
Ltd. At Chormara accused persons Rohita Bagarty,
Page 4 of 14
Dharanidhar Sahu, Ramakanta Sahu, Lingaraj Bag and Satya
Bagarty were members of an unlawful assembly, armed with
lathi, iron pipe, electric wire, brick bat etc. accused persons
Rohita, Dharani and Satya had trespassed into the residence of
P.Ws.10, 11 and 12 after making preparation to cause hurt to
them, accused Satya caused grievous hurt to P.Ws.11 and 12 by
assaulting them with iron pipe/iron rod and accused persons
Rohita, Dharanidhar, Ramakanta and Lingaraj Bag assaulted
other injured persons by means of lathi, electric wire, iron rod
etc. causing simple injuries on their person.
20. In the result, accused persons Rohita Bagarty,
Dharanidhar Sahu are found guilty U/s 148, 323 and 452
I.P.C., accused persons Ramakanta Sahu and Lingaraj Bag
U/S 148 and 323 I.P.C. and accused Satya Bagarty U/S 148,
452 and 325 I.P.C. and are convicted thereunder. Remaining
accused persons are acquitted enjoying benefit of doubt U/S
235 (1) Cr. P.C. and are discharged from their bail bonds.”
8. The appellants are aggrieved by the findings recorded by the
learned Court below holding them guilty of the offences, as mentioned
above and sentenced them on that count, therefore, they have filed the
present appeal.
9. In the present case, as many as eight persons have been injured,
out of them, the prosecution has examined six witnesses, namely, P.Ws.
1, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Twenty-nine accused persons stood charged for
the alleged commission of offence under Sections 147/14/452/380/506/
307/149 of IPC. Out of them, five accused persons those who were
Page 5 of 14
accused nos.17, 22, 24, 26 and 29 are convicted. All these five accused
those who have been convicted, have preferred the present appeal.
During the pendency of the appeal, accused no.22, i.e., appellant no.2
has died. Therefore, the appeal qua him stood abated. In so far as the
appellant nos.1, 3, 4 and 5 are concerned, all of them were arrested on
22.03.1994 and were granted bail by the trial court on 26.03.1994. By
the impugned judgment dated 31.03.1997, the appellant no.1 has been
convicted for the offence under Sections 148/452/325 of IPC and has
been substantively sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year, whereas
appellant no.3 has been convicted for the offence under Sections 148/323
of IPC and also sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year. Similarly, the
appellant nos.4 and 5 have been convicted for the offence under Sections
148/452/323 of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for one
year.
10. Learned counsels appearing for both the parties have taken me to
the evidence on record to substantiate their respective case. By the help
of the learned counsels, I have gone through the entire evidence in detail.
Page 6 of 14
Instead of adverting to the evidence of all the witnesses, it would be
enough to delve upon the evidence of the injured witnesses.
11. P.W.1, Prafulla Kumar Chand, in his testimony has categorically
stated that appellant nos.3, 4 and 5 were assaulted him by way of lathi
and iron rod. While they were assaulting, P.Ws.6, 8 and 9 and one
Sanjay Kumar Upadhya and Ajay Kumar Gupta came there and were
witnessed the incident. The said witness in paragraph-3 of his
examination-in-chief has stated as under:-
“3. At that time the production manager of the factory Ranjit
Kumar Mishra came out from his house. The accused persons
also assaulted him and out of fear he went inside his house to
save his life. Then the accused persons entered inside his house
and assaulted his brother Mandhata Mishra and looted away
house hold articles, cash etc. from the house of Ranjit Kumar
Mishra. Then the accused persons went to the house of Ujjal
Chandra Giri, a mechanical engineer of the factory and
entered inside his house and assaulted him and looted away
watch, cash etc. from his house. Devendra Kumar Parija,
Prafulla Kumar Rout, Damodar Mishra, Ashok Kumar Patel
and Sushanta Kumar Rout and others have seen the incident.
Earlier the accused persons had threatened me and others to
leave the job of the factory and go away failing which we will
face dire consequences.”
In his evidence, he has very categorically deposed that the brother of
Ranjit Kumar Mishra, namely, Mandhata Mishra was assaulted by the
Page 7 of 14
accused persons. Mandhata Mishra was examined as P.W.12, who in his
testimony in para-2 has stated as under:
“2. The mob abused Mr. P.K. Chand and assaulted him. When
we wanted to save P.K. Chand and intervened the pacify the
situation, the accused persons namely, Rohit Bagarty, Dharani
Sahu and Satya Rana assaulted my elder brother (p.w.11) for
which he sustained injury. When I came to the rescue of my
brother, accused Satya Rana assaulted me by iron rod causing
injury on my left fore arm near wrist and it was a fracture
injury. Accused Dharanidhar Sahu and Rohita Bagarty and
others dealt me blows by lathi and also assaulted me by electric
wire (hand made chain) causing injury on my body. Out of fear
myself and my brother went inside our quarters. Then the
accused persons followed us and brick bating and lathi blows
broken out the window of our quarters and then came to our
house and threatened us to leave the job and to go away. At the
time of altercation, the wrist watch of my elder brother p.w.11
was lost. Then the accused persons went to the quarters of Ujal
Giri. Then we came to Titilagarh P.S. from where we were sent
to hospital for medical examination. I was examined by
doctor.”
Similarly, P.W.6-Ram Singhasan Tiwari, who was employed as a
security guard in the colony and was also assaulted by the accused
persons, inter alia, deposed as under:
“1. I know some of the accused persons present in the dock. I
know Prafulla Kumar Chand. The occurrence took place on
31.1.94 at about 4.40 P.M. inside the paper mill premises in the
colony. At that time I was on security guard duty in the backyard
of the mill premises. I heard commotion from the colony side.
Then I along with Sadhu Patel, Sanjay Upadhya and Santosh
Bhoi went towards colony side, we saw the accused personsPage 8 of 14
assaulting Prafulla Kumar Chand. We came to his rescue to
save him. Then accused Rohit, Dharani, Pankaj and others
assaulted me by lathi and they also dealt me fist blows. Due to
assault I sustained injury on the left wrist arm. When Ranjit
Mishra, production manager of the mill and his brother
Mandhata came to our rescue, then accused persons also
assaulted them. Out of fear Ranjit and his brother Mandhata
went inside the quarters but the accused persons charged after
them and pelted stone to their houses and they also broke open
the window. Later on I came to P.S. and was sent for medical
examination.”
P.W.8, who was also an injured witness has stated in his
examination-in-chief as under:
“1. I know the informant of this case Prafulla Kumar Chand,
who was working as cashier in Spas Paper mill, Chormara. I
am the director of the paper mill. I know the accused persons
present in the dock. The occurrence took place on 31.1.94 at
about 4.45 P.M. On the day of occurrence while I was present
in the mill premises I heard commotion at the colony side. Then
I along with Santosh Bhoi, Ajay Gupta, Sanjay Upadhya went
to the colony side. Then we saw nearly 40 to 50 persons have
surrounded the informant and they were assaulting him. Then
we came to the rescue of the informant, Rohit Bagarty,
Dharanidhar Sahu, Ramakanta Sahu, Satya Rana and others
assaulted us by lathi. Accused Rohit Bagarty, Ramakanta Sahu,
Dharanidhar Sahu assaulted me by lathi causing injury on my
left hand wrist back, left leg and thigh and right hand. Ranjit
Mishra and Mandhata Mishra of our mill came to our rescue.
But the above noted persons also chased after Ranjit Mishra
and Mandhata Mishra and assaulted them. Out of fear Ranjit
Mishra and Mandhata Mishra went inside their houses. The
accused persons chased after them and pleted stones and they
also broke the T.V. antenna of Ujal Giri. The accused persons
also broke the window and door of Ranjit Mishra by brickPage 9 of 14
bating. Then the informant came in a truck and reported the
matter at Titilagarh police. We the injured persons came to
Titilagarh in a jeep to P.S. and then sent to Titilagarh hospital
for our medical examination.”
P.W.10 has also narrated the event very meticulously and stated
that he was also assaulted by the accused persons and in paragraph-2 of
the examination in chief, he has stated as under:
“2. When I went outside the accused persons on seeing me
pelted stones. Out of fear I came inside my house and closed the
doors. Shortly after the accused persons by breaking open the
door entered inside my house, accused Rohit Bagarty assaulted
on my head by lathi causing bleeding injury. Accused Dharani
gave the lashes by a electric wire causing injury on my back.
Accused Satya Rana assaulted by G.I. pipe on my right knee
causing injury. Due to assault and bleeding injury I felt dizzy
and fell down. Others whom I cannot identify also assaulted me.
Thinking me dead the accused persons left the place. Accused
Biswamitra and accused Kamalu were also present in the mob.”
P.W.11, Ranjit Kumar Mishra, who is an important witness, who
was the first victim at the hands of the accused persons in his testimony
in para-1 has stated as under:
“1. On 31.1.94 I was working in SPAA paper mill at
Chomara in the capacity of production manager. On that day
at about 4.30 P.M. I heard a commotion near colony side
situated in the factory premises. On hearing noise I came out of
the paper mill and went towards the colony. I saw 40 to 50
persons shouting the security supervisor of the mill Mr. Gupta,
and other employees namely Mr. Upadhya and Mr. Tiwari andPage 10 of 14
Mr. Patel also followed me towards the colony side. On seeing
the mob which was furious abused me in filthy language saying
Sala Magiha etc. I saw the mob assaulting P.K. Chand. When
Mr. Upadhya and Mr. Patel and Mr. Tiwari wanted to pacify
the situation they requested the mob to desist from unlawful
activity, the mob did not listen and assaulted Mr. Upadhya and
others. When I intervened accused Satya Rana who was
holding a pipe assaulted me causing injury on my left hand
finger which was fractured. Accused Rohit Bagarty and
accused Dharani Sahu assaulted me by lathi causing on my
right fore arm and left thigh. When I was assaulted my younger
brother Mandhata Mishra came to me. Then the accused
persons leaving me assaulted Mandhata Mishra for which he
sustained injuries. Then we went to our quarters to save
ourselves from further assault. The mob followed us and
pushed the door of my quarters by lathi and then they broke the
doors of the quarters. 5 persons entered inside my drawing
room. At that time my wrist watch was taken away by
somebody which I could not find out. Then the mob broke the
G.I. pipe fixed nearby with a T.V. antenna. Then the mob went
inside the quarters of Ujal Giri and assaulted him, which I
subsequently came to know. After half an hour Mr. Chand
came in a truck to Titilagarh P.S. and shortly after we came to
Titilagarh hospital in a jeep. I was medically examined on
police requisition.”
12. The version of the injured witnesses, as discussed above, has been
supported by not only the eye witness like P.W.2 and other witnesses,
but also draws corroboration from the formal witnesses like the seizure
witness and all. P.W.18 was the doctor, who had examined all the
injured. He in his testimony has stated that apart from P.W.9, P.Ws. 1, 8,
10, 11 and 12 and one Ajay Kumar Gupta and Sanjay Kumar Upadhya
Page 11 of 14
were also examined by him. He has narrated the injury sustained by all
the injured persons, which has been caused by the main accused persons
in the testimony of P.Ws. 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. In the cross
examination, the said witness, namely, P.W.18 has stated as under:-
“11. I had no prior acquaintance with the injured persons. I
remember that the injured persons told me that due to some
quarrel they sustained injuries on their person. The examination
of the injured was medico legal cases. I do not remember if I had
informed the local police accordingly prior to my medical
examination of the injured persons. I do not remember if I
advised some of the injured persons to get themselves admitted
in the hospital as indoor patients. If somebody had got bruises
and abrasions on his person and comes to the hospital we
generally do not admit him. In some cases without x-ray
examination it can be well said that the injuries fractured and a
grievous one.”
13. Conjoint reading of the evidences, which has been brought on
record by the prosecution overwhelmingly, establishes the prosecution
version. Therefore, the appellants cannot escape from the conviction, as
recorded by the trial court. The trial court has very meticulously dealt
with the evidence of the witnesses to arrive at a conclusion that the
appellants whose names have been repeatedly taken by all the injured
witnesses are guilty of offences, as mentioned above. Therefore, I am not
Page 12 of 14
inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. Hence, I affirm the
conviction recorded by the learned trial court against all the appellants.
14. At this stage, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants submitted that the incident relates back to the year 1994 and at
that point of time the appellants were in early thirties and at present the
appellants are in their mid-fifties and the fact that they have a clean
antecedent and they have already settled in their life. Therefore,
incarcerating them at this belated stage would be un-equitable and harsh.
In that view of the matter, Mr. Mishra, submitted that the substantive
sentence of one year imposed by the learned trial court may be reduced
to that of the sentence the appellants have already undergone or this
Court may take a lenient view by granting the benefit of the provisions
under the Probation of Offenders Act.
15. In view of the nature of offence committed by the appellants, I am
not inclined to take a lenient view, rather suffice to say that the period of
one year as sentenced to the appellants reduced down to the sentence
each of the appellants have already undergone. However, the appellants
shall pay a fine of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) each, in default,
Page 13 of 14
they shall undergo R.I. for one month. The fine amount to be deposited
by each of the appellants, shall be disbursed to the injured persons
proportionately, in accordance with the provisions of Section 357 of
Cr.P.C.
16. The Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
The High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Dated the 19th August 2025/Ashok
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 21-Aug-2025 10:22:37 Page 14 of 14