| New Delhi |
November 22, 2020 2:23:46 am
In a setback to BJP nationwide vice-president Baijayant Panda, the Orissa High Court has refused to intervene in a case of alleged grabbing of land belonging to individuals belonging to the Dalit neighborhood by an organization owned by Panda.
The case is being investigated by Odisha Police underneath numerous sections of IPC and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The court docket additionally cleared the best way for the arrest of Panda and his spouse Jagi, co-promoter of the corporate, Odisha Infratech Pvt Ltd (OIPL), by vacating all earlier interim orders. The HC had earlier handed an interim order granting them safety towards arrest.
The Pandas had moved HC for quashing the FIR towards them and OIPL.
On Saturday, the Pandas denied all allegations towards them and blamed the event on Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik’s vendetta politics. “…There has been no wrongdoing by us and we’re assured that this can in the end be proved within the courts,” Jagi Panda mentioned in a press release.
In the order pronounced on Friday, Justice B P Routray mentioned: “I’m not inclined to intervene with the legal proceedings, extra notably on the stage of pending investigation. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners is rejected and the Criminal Misc. Case is dismissed. All interim orders handed stand vacated.”
The Pandas had alleged of their petition that the FIR was a results of “malice” and “ulterior motive” on the behest of “the ruling political get together”. The court docket rejected the allegation on the bottom that “the identical shouldn’t be discovered with supported supplies”.
On October 31, the Economic Offence Wing of Odisha Police had registered an FIR alleging that one Rabindra Kumar Sethi, an individual from Dalit neighborhood who was as soon as a driver with Panda’s firm ORTEL Communication Ltd, was allegedly pressured by the Pandas to buy 7.294 acres of land from 22 Dalit individuals in Odisha’s Khurda district between 2010 and 2013. This was to allegedly circumvent state legal guidelines that forestall buy of land owned by Dalits by non-Dalits.
The land was allegedly bought at 50 per cent of the market worth, in keeping with the FIR. This land was later taken over by OIPL for actual property growth from Sethi for declared consideration of Rs 65 lakh, though no quantity was allegedly paid to Sethi, in keeping with the FIR.
Sources mentioned Sethi was proven to have bought this patch of land — falling in between a 100-acre plot that Pandas have been creating – together with his month-to-month wage of Rs 8,000.
A senior Odisha Police officer mentioned, “Sethi and others (from whom land was bought) have already recorded their statements earlier than a Justice of the Peace.”
In Odisha, underneath the Land Revenue Act, Dalits should not allowed to promote their whole land holding to non-Dalits with out permission of the district collector.
In a press release, Jagi Panda mentioned: “In the previous two months Odisha police have registered about 20 false circumstances towards OTV, its sister firms, workers and my relations, together with my 84-year-old father…. We vehemently deny these allegations…. We assert that these circumstances are being orchestrated by the 21-year-old BJD authorities in Odisha, due to CM Naveen Patnaik’s private vendetta towards us.”
On allegations within the FIR, the court docket order acknowledged, “In the context of the allegations, it’s seen that the petitioners used reverse get together No. 3 (Sethi) as an instrument or to say, because the ‘sham purchaser’ to get the land of their favour. When the investigation continues to be persevering with and originally [initial] stage, the competition that supplies should not justifying for investigation is thus not discovered right. It additionally can’t be mentioned that the allegations are so absurd or inherently inconceivable.”
The Pandas argued in court docket that not one of the offences underneath SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out or constituted, but it surely has been intentionally added to disclaim them the good thing about anticipatory bail. The court docket rejected this and noticed that the allegations “positively fall inside” particular clauses of the Act.
The Pandas had submitted that the FIR had been registered to settle a rating, as OTV, owned by them, had broadcast a dialog of two pals referring to their expertise at a Covid hospital.
📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and keep up to date with the most recent headlines
© The Indian Express (P) Ltd