CRLMC/4210/2025 of PRAFULLA KUMAR SWAIN Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 31 August 2026

ORDER

31.08.2026 Order No.

04.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the Private Opposite Party No.2 and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Party No.1. Perused the CRLMC application as well as the prayer made therein.

3. By filing the present application under Section 528 of the BNSS, the accused-Petitioner in G.R. Case No.1317 of 2025 now pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C.-II (Cog. Taking), Cuttack which corresponds to Tangi P.S. Case No.276 dated

22.08.2025 which was registered for commission of an offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 3(5) of BNS read with section 66(C) and section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, has approached this Court by filing the abovenoted application with a prayer for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding on the grounds that the matter has already amicably settled between the Parties. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset further submitted that due to a misunderstanding between the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 the abovenoted criminal case was initiated at the instance of Opposite Party No.2-Informant. He further contended that in the meantime, the Parties have settled the dispute amicably and that the Informant is no more interested to proceed further in this case.

4. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the joint affidavit filed by the Petitioner and the Informant before this Court on 22.06.2026. On the basis of the aforesaid settlement, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the further continuance of the present criminal proceeding would be an abuse of the process of law and, accordingly, prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the Informant, on the other hand, while supporting the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, referred to the joint affidavit filed by the both the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 and contended that the dispute between the Petitioner and the Informant arose due to a misunderstanding between the two, but it has now been amicably resolved. He further contended that the Informant does not want to proceed further in this case against the present Petitioner and that the Informant will have no objection, in the event the entire criminal proceeding against the Petitioner is quashed.

6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, on instruction from the IIC, Tangi P.S., vide letter dated 04.08.2026, submitted before this Court that pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the IIC, Tangi P.S. has furnished instruction stating therein that the Parties have amicably settled their dispute and have filed an affidavit before this Court admittedly the same. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Government Advocate contended before this Court that in view of the aforesaid subsequent development, he will have no objection in the event this Court passes any appropriate order to secure the ends of justice.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the Parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the subsequent development, particularly the settlement of the dispute between the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2-Informant, further taking note of the joint affidavit filed before this Court as well as the instruction from the IIC, Tangi P.S. vide letter dated 04.08.2026, this Court found that the dispute has already been amicably settled between the Petitioner and the Informant. It further appears that the Informant does not want to proceed further in this case and, that the Informant has no objection to the entire criminal proceeding against the Petitioner being quashed.

8. In such backdrop, this Court is of the view that further continuance of the criminal proceeding would amount to only abuse of the process of law, as well as wastage of the Court’s valuable time. As such, this Court is of the considered view that the present case is a fit case where this Court ought to exercise its interest powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (now Section 528 of BNSS) to quash the present proceeding against the Petitioner in the larger interest of justice. Hence, the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.1317 of 2025 pending before the learned J.M.F.C.-II (Cog. Taking), Cuttack and FIR dated 23.08.2025, against the Petitioner, are hereby quashed.

9. Accordingly, the CRLMC application stands disposed of.

( A.K. Mohapatra )

Judge

Sisir

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 03-Sep-2026 20:20:49 Signature Not Verified