The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3001 of 2025 Arati Meher and others ..... Petitioner State of Odisha and otehrs -versus- ..... Represented By Adv. - Kshirod Kumar Rout Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. U.R. Jena, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 18.09.2025 Order No. 02. 1. 2. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. The present application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed at the instance of the Petitioners, who were students and ex-students of Ravenshaw University at the relevant point of time, with a prayer for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Malgodown P.S. Case No.0169 of 2019, corresponding to G.R. Case No.1423 of 2019, pending before the learned J.M.F.C.-III (Cog. Taking), Cuttack. 4. The present case arises out of Malgodown P.S. Case No.0169 dated 06.09.2019 which was registered on basis of an FIR lodged by the S.I. of Malgodown P.S. alleging student agitation and blockage of road by the students. Accordingly, the FIR was registered for commission of offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 283, 294, 506, 353 of IPC. After registration of the FIR the investigation started and finally on 23.02.2021, a Page 1 of 5. charge-sheet has been filed under the above noted sections against the Petitioners and other co-accused persons. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioners were students of Ravenshaw University at the relevant point of time. While they were studying at Ravenshar College on 05.09.2019 an accident took place in front of the road leading to the University, as a result of which, a student of the University died. Such incident raised the commotion of the students and as such, many students of the University spontaneously came out to the road to protest against the traffic mismanagement due to which the aforesaid accident had taken place. He further referred to the FIR and submitted that even the Informant has indicated such facts in the FIR and that the Informant has also categorically stated that the students demanded for adequate traffic arrangements in front of the University and removal of the encroachment and construction of the speed breakers in front of the University. Although the Informant, who is the S.I. of the Malgodown P.S., has stated that the agitating students used abuse language, however, there is no such allegation with regard to causing any damage to the public property or causing any injury to anybody. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that no case is made out against the accused persons including the present Petitioners as they were protesting peacefully and demanding adequate traffic arrangements and removal of encroachment near the University and for construction of speed breakers. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that unless the present criminal proceeding, which is pending since the year 2019, is quashed, the Petitioners are likely to suffer. He further submitted that the quashing of the present criminal proceeding would be in the larger interest of justice and save the innocent Petitioners from the harassment of an adverse impact in their career. Page 2 of 5. 6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that the Petitioners have been specifically named in the FIR. He further contended that on the basis of the allegation made in the FIR, a case is well made out against the present Petitioners. It was also contended that the statements of the witnesses was recorded by the Police during the investigation. It was also contended that in the meantime the investigation has been concluded and a final charge-sheet has been filed on 23.02.2021. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that the present case does not call for any interference by this Court at this juncture. Accordingly, it was contended that the prayer of the Petitioners for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding is devoid of merit and the same be rejected at the threshold. 7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a close scrutiny of the materials on record, further taking into consideration the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case as is evident from the FIR at Annexure-1, this Court found that on the relevant date, i.e., on 06.09.2019 when the occurrence took place the students of the University were agitating against the authorities for taking necessary steps to prevent road accidents in front of the University. This was being done in the background of the accident that had taken place on the previous day, i.e., on 05.09.2019 leading to death of a student of the University. It also appears that the FIR has been registered by the S.I. of the Malgodown P.S., who was on duty at the spot. Upon a careful examination of the FIR story as has been narrated in the FIR, even accepting the same to be true, this Court observes that there is no allegation with regard to causing any damage to the public property or causing any injury to any of the Police personnel engaged nor is there any allegation that any public injury has been caused. It is also a settled position of law that right to protest in peaceful manner is Page 3 of 5. a right guaranteed to every citizen of this country. However, such protest must be done in a peaceful and non-violent manner. Taking into consideration the background in which the protest took place, this Court observes that the death of the student in a road accident on the previous day has caused commotion and outrage among the college students. Although violence in any form is to be deprecated, this Court found that the FIR does not specifically speak about any violence being committed by the Petitioners except causing inconvenience to the public by blocking the public road and using abusive language against the Police on duty. Moreover, this Court found that the students had a legitimate demand with regard to the road safety in front of the University and that the FIR also indicates the aforesaid facts. The S.I. of the Malgodown P.S. has categorically stated that the students demanded removal of the encroachment, adequate traffic arrangements in front of the University and for construction of speed breakers. All these demands are legitimate demands considering the road safety in front of the College. Moreover, such demand and protest was done in the background of the incident that had taken place on the previous day. So far as, the registration of the criminal case and long pendency thereof is concerned, this Court is of the view that the same is likely to affect the career of the students. Therefore, this Court is of the view that in the aforesaid factual background the prayer for quashing is to be considered by keeping in view the fact as to whether the students were indulged in any kind of violence on causing damage to the public property. However, there is no such allegation of causing damage to the public property or causing any hurt or injury to any of the passes by. 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis of the factual position, this Court has come to a conclusion that even accepting the allegation made in the FIR in its entirety, no case under the alleged sections is made out against the Page 4 of 5. present Petitioners. Further, in the absence of any allegation with regard to the damage being caused to any public property or any injury having been sustained by any passers-by, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case where this Court can exercise its inherent power conferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed and the entire criminal proceeding launched against the Petitioners vide G.R. Case No.1423 of 2019, which arises out of Malgodown P.S. Case No.0169 of 2019, pending in the court of the learned J.M.F.C.-III (Cog. Taking), Cuttack, is hereby quashed, so far as the present Petitioners are concerned. The learned J.M.F.C.-III (Cog. Taking), Cuttack or the court in seisin over the matter shall, on receipt of this order/production of the certified copy of this order, close the proceeding in the aforesaid case in compliance of this order. Debasis ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 19-Sep-2025 14:07:06 Page 5 of 5.