Criminal complaint against IAS officer quashed by Orissa HC

During the course of the proceedings, the SDM requested the presentation of evidence from the second party.
Image used for representational purpose
Image used for representational purpose

CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings pending against T Wapang Ao, an IAS officer of Odisha cadre, for allegedly passing defamatory remarks on a lawyer when he was sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) at Malkangiri 20 years back.

Acting on a complaint by the lawyer, the court of Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM), Malkangiri, had taken cognizance of the allegation under section 500/506 of IPC against Wapang. Later, the SDJM rejected Wapang’s petition to be discharged of the offences on August 16, 2023. He had then challenged it in high court.

“In my opinion, the complaint filed under Sections 500 and 506 of the IPC lacks basic ingredients and no useful purpose would be served in permitting the trial court to proceed with the complaint,” the single judge bench of Justice SK Panigrahi observed in order, a copy of which was released by the high court on Monday.

“I also wish to express my deep concern regarding the protracted litigation surrounding what can only be described as a trivial case. It is disheartening to witness legal proceedings stretch over two decades, consuming valuable time, resources, and judicial bandwidth,” Justice Panigrahi also observed.

The alleged incident occurred on August 5, 2003, when Gobinda Patra, an advocate of the local bar, appeared before the SDM, Malkangiri, to argue his case. During the proceedings, the SDM requested the presentation of evidence from the second party.

But Patra raised objections on the ground that such a request contradicted procedural norms. In response to this objection, the SDM allegedly raised his voice, stating, “Shut up, Tu Jaa re, Tu Kia Mote Procedure Sikhayibu!?” (shut up, you go from here, you cannot teach me procedure). Patra had then filed the complaint.

Justice Panigrahi held that the aforementioned remark by itself doesn’t have the propensity to harm the reputation of the lawyer/complainant.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com