IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.772 of 2026 Brajesh Agrawal .... Petitioner(s) Mr. Trilochan Nanda, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party (s) Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER 13.03.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. The Petitioner has filed this CRLMC with a prayer to quash the order dated 15.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantabanji in S.C. No.43/20 of 2010-16 arising out of Kantabanji P.S. Case No.92 of 2007. 3. He further sought for a direction from this Court to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantabanji to dispose of the S.C. Case No.43/20 of 2010-16 within a stipulated period of time. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after submission of the charge sheet, the learned JMFC, Kantabanji took cognizance of the offences and thereafter, the case was committed to the court of Sessions. Charge has been framed against the petitioner and other accused persons by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantabanji vide order dated 25.11.2023. In the meantime, eight witnesses have Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 16-Mar-2026 17:15:05 Signature Not Verified 2 already been examined from the side of the prosecution before the learned trial court. The prosecution has failed to produce the official witnesses for their examination before the learned trial court though sufficient time and several opportunities have already been granted to the prosecution for the said purpose. Moreover, eight independent witnesses who have been examined by the prosecution have not supported the prosecution case and as such the prosecution has failed to establish any incriminating material against the accused persons. Therefore, the accused persons on 19.12.2025 filed a petition under Section 232 of the CrPC/ Section-255 of the BNSS, 2023 with a prayer for early acquittal. 5. He further submits that right to speedy trial is a fundamental right of the accused as enshrined under Article- 21 of the Constitution of India. In the case at hand, the FIR was lodged against the petitioner and other accused persons in the year 2007. But, till date the case has not been taken to its logical conclusion and the trial has not ended. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the learned trial court for disposal of the case within a stipulated time frame for the ends of justice. 6. Upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the Petitioner was the instrumental in obtaining the stay order from this Court which was vacated vide order dated 16.05.2023. Hence, the trial court could Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 16-Mar-2026 17:15:05 Signature Not Verified 3 not proceed. On 25.11.2023 charge was framed against the accused persons and the trial is going on. In the meantime, 8 prosecution witnesses have already been examined but the official witnesses have not been examined. 7. In such view of the matter, this Court directs the I.G of Police, CID CB, Cuttack to produce all the official witnesses before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantabanji on each date of posting of the case for conclusion of the trial at the earliest possible. 8. The CRLMC is disposed of, accordingly. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Gitanjali