The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.5493 of 2023 Gagan Parida & others …. Petitioners Mr. D.N. Pattanaik, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & another …. Opp. Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr. B.K. Ragada, AGA Mr. P. Nayak, Advocate for the opposite party no.2 CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Decision
Order No. 04. 1. 2. ORDER 04.10.2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties. At the instance of the opposite party no.2, the F.I.R., i.e., Khurda P.S. Case No.577 of 2015 came to be registered against the petitioners under Sections 452/ 294/ 323/ 324/354/307/506/34 of the IPC corresponding to G.R. Case No.1282 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Khurda. The petitioners are seeking quashing of the entire criminal prosecution on the ground of settlement they arrived at, with the informant and the injured. 3. The matter was taken up on 23.09.2024 and the following order was passed: “1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners and opposite party no.2 are present in the Court today along with their respective counsel and identified by them. They have also filed their self attested copies of the Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record. The victim/injured is in terrible condition. Therefore, he appears this Court through virtual mode. 3. On the query from this Court, the informant (opposite party no.2), who is mother of the victim, stated that unless his son (victim/injured) gives consent, the matter may not be settled. The informant submits that because of the assault caused by the petitioners, her son is suffering. Even the victim, who has appeared through virtual mode started crying, he seems to be in a very bad health condition. 4. It appears that the petitioners have tried to pressurize the informant/opposite party no.2 to settle the dispute. 5. In that view of the matter, the I.I.C., Khurda Police Station is directed to enquire about the factum of the settlement and genuineness of the affidavit filed by the victim/injured before this Court and submit a report. If it is found that the petitioners are involved in influencing the informant to settle the dispute, the I.I.C., Khurda Police Station is directed to immediately register a case against the petitioners and investigate into the matter. The report be submitted before this Court within a week. 6. List this matter on 4th of October, 2024.” 4. Pursuant to the aforementioned order, the I.I.C., Model Police Station, Khurda has submitted a report dated 01.10.2024, which reads as under: “With reference to the Subject cited above, I have the honour to report that during enquiry it came to my notice that both the parties have made compromise on 11.09.2024. During my verification 1. Labanya Sahoo (69), W/o – Lt. Bhagaban Sahoo, At-Samantarapur, Swapneswarsahi, PS-Model, Dist-Khurda (Informant), 2. Ganesh Sahoo (35), S/o-Lt. Bhagaban Sahoo of Samantarapur, Seapenswarsahi, PS-Model, Dist- Khurda (Injured), 3. Gagan Parida (40), S/o-Pathani Parida of Samantarapur, Swapneswarsahi, PS-Model, Dist-Khurda (Petition) all are present and also agreed to the compromise they have made on 11.09.2024. There is no objection from any side. The petitioners are not involved in influence the informant to settle the dispute.” 5. The petitioners and opposite party no.2 and the injured are present in the Court today along with their respective counsel and identified by them. They have also filed their self attested copies of the Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record. 6. The petitioners and opposite party no.2 have filed joint affidavit dated 11.09.2024, inter alia, stating that due to misunderstanding between them, the F.I.R. was lodged. Now they have already settled their dispute. Therefore, the opposite party no.2 does not want to prosecute the petitioners any more. The relevant part of the said affidavit reads as under: “2. That, the deponents serial No.1 to 10 are the petitioners where as serial No.11 is the opp. party no- 2/informant in the aforesaid case. 3. That, both the parties have lodged FIRs against each other basing upon self same occurrence took place on 24.11.2015 where in two different FIRs have been registered as Khurda PS case no.-577/2015 dtd. 24.11.2015 corresponds to G.R. case no.1282/2015 for commission of offences u/s452-341-294-323-324- 354-307-506-34 of IPC similarly another FIR was registered as Khordha PS case no.576/2015 corresponding to G.R. case no.1281/2015 (ST case no-38/2023) for commission of offences 324, 307, 506, 34 of IPC. 4. That, during trial, the matter was settled between both the parties by intervening the village gentries accordingly they entered into the settlement on the basis of compromise, on the basis of the compromise the informant groups have been acquitted in the view of the judgment dated 7.8.2023 passed in ST case No- 38/2023 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, cum ASJ (Women’s Court), Khordha. 5. That, therefore, the informant does not want to proceed with the case further, hence the same maybe quashed.” 7. Mr. Ragada, learned counsel for the State submits that the parties have settled their dispute and the informant a well as the victim are present in the Court and has categorically stated that they do not want to proceed with the case and there was a counter case filed by the victim against the petitioners, which ended in acquittal. Therefore, in the peculiarity of the present case, this Court can give indulgence as there is no legal impediment. 8. Regard being had to the aforementioned circumstances and since the opposite party no.2 is not willing to proceed against the petitioners, the present petition is squarely covered by the judgments 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. Since subjecting the petitioners to the rigors of trial will be a futile exercise, I am inclined to quash the criminal proceeding. 9. In view of the aforementioned facts of the case and submissions made at bar, Khurda P.S. Case No.577 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1282 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Khurda and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed subject to the petitioners paying cost of Rs.5,000/- each to the opposite party no.2 and the injured/victim within a week. 10. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of. Judge (S.S. Mishra) amit Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 08-Oct-2024 14:15:46