The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC NO.1770 of 2020 (In the matter of application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.). Narayan Panda & another …. Petitioners -versus- State of Orissa … Opposite Party For Petitioners : Mr. B.K.Nayak. Advocate For Opposite Party : Mr. M.Mishra, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY DATE OF HEARING :06.01.2023 DATE OF JUDGMENT:27.01.2023 G. Satapathy, J. 1. The petitioners in this CRLMC U/S. 482 of Cr.P.C seek the indulgence of the Court to quash the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No. 751 of 2018 of the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara. CRLMC No.1770 of 2020 Page 1 of 7 2. Facts in nutshell are on 09.05.2018 at about 7 A.M. in the morning while the informant and her husband were opening the centring of the roof of their house, the petitioners came there and abused in filthy language and when the informant protested, petitioner No.1 gave a push to her as a result, she fell down and sustained swealing injury on the back of her head and when her husband protested, the petitioner No.1 intending to kill him assaulted by pushing him to floor and giving fist and kick blows and petitioner No.1 also threatened the informant not to disclose the fact to anybody by holding her saree. On this incident, the informant and her husband informed the police on the same day but when the police did not take any action, they also approached the S.P., Puri on 15.05.2018 and, thereby, there is a delay in lodging of the complaint before the Court. On the above averments, the
Facts
informant filed a complaint against the petitioners in CRLMC No.1770 of 2020 Page 2 of 7 the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara in I.CC No. 92 of 2018 which was sent to the Police Station U/S. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. paving the way for registration of police case with commencement of investigation resulting in submission of charge sheet against the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have
Legal Reasoning
knocked the door of this Court in an application U/S. 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceeding initiated against them. 3. In the course of hearing of CRLMC, Mr.B.K.Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present FIR is an outcome of previous civil dispute relating to partition of joint family properties which resulted in filing of suit in C.S. No. 193 of 2019 in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Puri by one of the member of joint family and the informant has filed this complaint in order to get rid of the case initiated by petitioner No.1-Narayan Panda by filing an FIR against the CRLMC No.1770 of 2020 Page 3 of 7 husband of the informant and others and, therefore, the present criminal proceeding is nothing but an abuse of process of Court. It is also alternatively submitted that the ingredients of U/S. 307 of IPC is not at all attracted against the petitioners and, therefore, the further proceeding against the petitioners for offence U/S. 307 of IPC is nothing but abuse of process of Court and, thereby such offence may be deleted against the petitioners in the course of trial. 3.1. Mr.M.Mishra, learned ASC in reply, however strongly opposes the prayer of the petitioners and he, inter alia submits that the materials on record clearly disclose commission of all the offences by the petitioners and, thereby, the present CRLMC is deliberately intended to confuse the Court and delaying the trial and, thereby, the present CRLMC being unmerited may kindly be dismissed. CRLMC No.1770 of 2020 Page 4 of 7 4. A careful perusal of the materials placed on record would go to disclose some allegations against the petitioners but there is some substance in the argument of the petitioners with regard to absence of ingredients of offence U/S. 307 of IPC but the petitioners have not made it clear as to the stage of the proceeding and whether cognizance has been taken in the meantime or not and if cognizance has been taken, whether charge has been framed or not. However, the materials on record prima facie disclose the ingredients of other offences and the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR and statement of witnesses disclose commission for such other offences against the petitioners. It is therefore, considered that the criminal proceeding as a whole against the petitioners cannot be considered an abuse of process of Court at this stage and thereby, the criminal proceeding against the petitioners cannot be quashed. CRLMC No.1770 of 2020 Page 5 of 7 5. It is no doubt clear that the prima facie criminal liability of the petitioners for commission of any specific offences can be ascertained at the stage of consideration of charge in which the grounds for presuming the commission of any offence by the accused is assessed by the learned trial Court and accordingly, accusations for such offences are acknowledged to the accused persons but in this case, there is no material being placed on record by the petitioners to show whether the criminal case has been committed to the Court of Sessions and accordingly, any Court of Session is seized of the matter. In such situation, the petitioners is at liberty to move an appropriate application before the Court in seisin of the case to delete the offence U/S. 307 of IPC at the time of consideration of charge, if the same has not been done and on such event, such Court of Sessions or the Additional/Asst. Sessions may pass appropriate
Decision
order independently CRLMC No.1770 of 2020 Page 6 of 7 evaluating the materials on record in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation made by this Court in this order. 6. In the result, the CRLMC is accordingly dismissed on contest with aforesaid liberty to the petitioners but in the circumstance without any order as to costs. Judge (G. Satapathy) Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 27th of January, 2023/Kishore CRLMC No.1770 of 2020 Page 7 of 7