The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 01. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No. 94 of 2025 Abhisek Parida @ Babulu …. Petitioner(s)
Legal Reasoning
Mr. D.K. Sahoo, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and another …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. B. Nayak, AGA Mr. G.B. Singh, Advocate (O.P.No.2) CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Decision
ORDER 11.02.2025 1. Mr. G.B. Singh, learned counsel enters appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 and files Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. 3. Heard. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. in Tantiapal Marine P.S. Case No. 170 of 2024 came to be registered against the petitioner corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2206 of 2024, pending in the court of the learned SDJM, Kendrapara for the alleged commission of offences under Section 354-D of the IPC. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that while the informant and her children are asleep in their house at late night she heard a noise and asked who is knocking the door in the late night, the petitioner approach for opening of the door who was in a Page 1 of 4 inebriated state. The informant refused to the same and took the video of the petitioner who is working as a Homeguard. The FIR has been registered on these allegations. 5. In the present case, investigation is still going on. At this stage, the parties have arrived at a settlement and on the basis of the settlement terms, the present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the entire criminal prosecution. 6. Petitioner and opposite party no.2 the informant are present in Court and being represented and identified by their respective counsels. They have also filed self-attested copies of their Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record. The parties have filed a joint affidavit dated 11.02.2025 inter alia stating as under:- “We both are well known to each other since long and are belongs to the same area due to some misunderstanding between us the informant file the written complain before the IIC Tantiapal police station for which FIR was registered but in the meantime we both of us settled the above matter for which I have no interest to proceed further in the above case for which we both us filing the above affidavit before this Hon’ble court for the appreciation of the fact and law involve in this case for ends of justice. 1. That, the opposite party no.2 who is well known to the petitioner and the informant in the above case filed a written report before the IIC Tantiapal Marine police station in which Tantiapal Marine PS Case No.170/2024, corresponding to GR Case No.2206/2024 was registered against the present petitioner for the commission of the offences under Section 78 of the BNS Act, 2023, corresponding to the old act under Section 354 of the IPC, Page 2 of 4 at present the above case is pending before the learned SDJM, Kendrapara for the further proceeding. 2. That fact remains the informant was inside the house and it was late night and she heard that some one calling her in late night and she saw it was night and the person calling seems to be the petitioner so in doubt she lodged the written report thereafter she was ascertain that the present petitioner is not at all calling her at night and due to some misunderstanding she has filed the above FIR against the present petitioner which has already been settled between the parties and we both having good relation and we are very cordial to each other for which I have no interest at all to proced further in the above case for which we both of us without any force pressure etc filing this affidavit for quashing of the FIR and proceeding thereon for ends of justice. 3. That continuance of the above case before the court below is only the misuse of the court time ultimately the cases will be completed in acquittal for which to save the time and for the interest of both the parties filing this affidavit before this hon’ble court for quashing of the FIR and proceeding thereon.” 7. On the query from the Court, opposite partyno.2 stated that due to misunderstanding she has lodged the FIR and investigation in the present case is still going on. However, they have arrived at a settlement and she does not want to proceed with the matter and pursuance to the same the petitioner has filed this petition seeking quashing of the proceeding. 8. Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the State submits that since the parties have settled the dispute and file affidavit before this Court, there is no legal impediment to quash the proceeding. Page 3 of 4 9. Regard being had to the allegation made by the opposite party no.2 against the petitioner and the fact that they have settled the dispute and filed affidavit before this Court, I am inclined to allow the present petition. Further, continuation of the present proceeding will not endure to the benefit to either parties and, therefore, in these circumstances subjecting the petitioner to rigors of the trial is destined to be futile exercise. The case of the petitioner is directly covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 and B.S. Joshi & others vs. State of Haryana & another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675. 10. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding in connection with Tantiapal Marine P.S. Case No. 170 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2206 of 2024, pending in the court of the learned SDJM, Kendrapara is quashed, subject to the petitioner paying Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) as cost to the opposite party no.2- informant and file receipt before this Court. 11. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 12-Feb-2025 13:54:51 Ashok (S.S. Mishra) Judge Page 4 of 4