AKSHAYA KUMAR PADHI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 561 -A, Criminal Procedure Code for expunging certain remarks made against the petitioner in the judgment passed in G. R. Case No. 840 of 1965. The petitioner was examined as P. W. 4 in the said case.

(2.) THE above mentioned G. R. Case was one under Section 409, I. P. C. for temporary misappropriation of Government money to the tune of Rs. 1000/ - by one Ramchand Misra, who at the relevant time was working as the Cashier in the Sadar Block Development Office No. I at Sambalpur. The material facts, relevant for the consideration of this case are that on 19.12.1963 the Sarpanch of Sankarma Gram Panchayat (P. W. 2) met the B. D. O. Incharge and requested him to take back Rs. 1000/ - which he (the Sarpanch) had earlier taken from the aforesaid B. D. O.s' office for the construction of a road. The petitioner (P. W. 4) who was then the B. D. O. Incharge directed the above -named Ramchod Misra, the accused in that case, to receive that amount. The accused accordingly received the amount of Rs. 1000/ - and granted P. W. 2 a receipt to that effect. Because of certain eventualities, with which we are not concerned in this case, the aforesaid Sarpanch (P. W. 2) again approached P. W. 4 on 29 -1 -64 for Rs. 4000/ - which had been sanctioned for the road construction work. The accused above -named on that date returned the aforesaid amount of Rs. 1000/ - which was previously handed over to him on 19 -12 -63. The aforesaid money was with the accused from 19 -12 -63 to 29 -1 -64 and he did not deposit the same in the B. D. O.'s office and did not show the same in the Cash Book of that office. The accused in that case pleaded not guilty and asserted that he acted all through on the advice and direction of P. W. 4 who was then the B. D. O. Incharge of that office. The court, on a consideration of the evidence and materials on record and facts and circumstances of the case acquitted the accused of the aforesaid charge. While discussing the evidence on record in the said judgment of acquittal, the court has recorded certain findings and observations, the relevant portions of which, are as follows:

(3.) ON the above considerations, such remarks and observations which are made by a judge for the purpose of weighing the evidence on record or for discussing the merits of the case or for arriving at a decision, and, are necessary for the due disposal of the case, should not and cannot be expunged merely because they hurt the witness or injure his reputation, causing consequential humility, difficulty and/or embarrassment to him. But those remarks and observations which are absolutely not called for or not justified on the evidence on record, or on the facts of the case, nor are necessary for the decision or disposal of the case and/or of a sweeping and general nature must always be avoided, for it is well recognised.