The instant case of M/S. Odisha Infratech Pvt. Ltd and others vs. The State of Odisha and others, The High court of Orissa had refused to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioners who are accused of grabbing land from people belonging to the scheduled caste community. The petitioner had approached the High court of Orissa under Section 482 of the CrPC. The accused company is owned by Baijayant Panda and Jagi Panda who are accused of purchasing the land from the scheduled caste landholders. It was alleged that the petitioners conspired against the landlords and grabbed their lands for the benefit of the company. They took advantage of the suppressed position of the opposite party their financial, social, and educational backwardness, and exploited them.
The suite scheduled lands were purchased at a rate which is far below the market rates, it was also alleged that inadequate consideration for which the land was brought was not even paid to the parties but the physical possession of the land was passed on to the company. The company indulged in various transactions of this sort form year 2010 to 2013, the matter came to light only when the company acquired the land from their own drivers. In the light of these irregularities, the company was accused of dispossessing the member belonging to scheduled castes from their lands. It was also observed that the company gave false information to the public servant to for making their transaction permissible. The Petitioners were booked under Section 3(1) (g) and Section 3(1)(g) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) and under the relevant provisions of the Indian penal code. The Economic Offences Wing did the investigation against the Company. The petitioners argued that the Government’s Charter of Duties excluded the Economic Offences Wing from investigating such an offense. It was also argued by the petitioners that his criminal proceedings were filed with malafide and ulterior motives. Finally, the court upon hearing the submissions held that the allegations are clear and candid, this court would not interfere with the proceedings in the stage of the pending investigation. Therefore, accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous petition was dismissed.