Orissa High Court
CRLMC/2423/2026 of SUBRAT BARIK Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 17 August 2026
of 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.2423 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010555352026 Subrat Barik ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. – Ms. A . Priyadarshini -versus- State of Odisha and another ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. – Mr. C.M. Singh, ASC Mr. Bidyadhar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.2423 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010555352026
Subrat Barik
.....
Petitioner
Represented by Adv. –
Ms. A. Priyadarshini
-versus-
State of Odisha and another
.....
Opposite Party
Represented by Adv. –
Mr. C.M. Singh, ASC
Mr. Bidyadhar
Mansingh, Advocate for
O.P. No.2-Informant
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
17.08.2026 Order No.
02.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.2-Informant and the learned counsel for the State-Opposite Party No.1.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present CRLMC application under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 with a prayer for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Jatani P.S. Case No.507 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable under Sections under Sections 318(4)/351(2) of B.N.S., 2023, which corresponds to G.R. Case No.871 of 2025, now pending in the court of the learned
J.M.F.C., Jatani.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that due to a misunderstanding the aforesaid F.I.R. has been registered at the instance of the Opposite Party No.2. She further contended that in the meantime parties tried to resolve the dispute amicably among themselves. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner prayed that the entire criminal proceeding against the Petitioner be quashed.
5. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2-Informant contended that in fact a talk of compromise is going on the basis of the bank statement, the parties are tried to resolve the dispute amicably.
6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, on the basis of the instruction from the IIC, Jatani Police Station dated 08.08.2026 pursuant to order dated 29.07.2026, submitted before this Court that no compromise has been arrived at between the parties as of now and that he could not obtain any information with regard to the amicable settlement of the case. He further submitted in the meantime the application has been filed and that the trial has commenced. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State objected to the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding.
7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the Petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the Informant and the learned counsel for the State, this Court found that no compromise has been arrived at as of now, between the Petitioner and the Informant, although it was stated by the learned counsel for the State that a talk of compromise is going on between the parties.
8. In such view of the matter, the present CRLMC is disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner and the Informant to move the learned trial court for compounding of the offences by filing an application, in the event a compromise is arrived at between the parties in the meantime. In the event any such application is filed, the same shall be dealt with by the learned trial court in accordance with law.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
Debasis
Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 19-Aug-2026 13:28:49 Signature Not Verified