Orissa High Court
CRLMP/2362/2022 of BALARAM MOHAPATRA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 29 June 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No.2362 of 2022 1. Balaram Mohapatra 2. Sarojini Mohapatra …. Petitioners None -versus- 1. State of Odisha 2. Durga Charan Mohapatra …. Opposite Parties Mr. Ashok Kumar Apat, Additional Government Advocate (For Opposite Party No.1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMP No.2362 of 2022
1. Balaram Mohapatra
2. Sarojini Mohapatra
….
Petitioners
None
-versus-
1. State of Odisha
2. Durga Charan Mohapatra
….
Opposite Parties
Mr. Ashok Kumar Apat,
Additional Government Advocate
(For Opposite Party No.1)
None
(For Opposite Party No.2)
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Order No.
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
29.06.2026
03. (Through Hybrid Mode)
1. None appears for the Petitioners and the Opposite Party No.2.
2. The CRLMP has been filed for quashing of the FIR in Lingaraj PS Case No.274 dated 27.10.2022 as well as the proceedings in CT No.655 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned SDJM, Bhubaneswar.
3. Considering the relation between the Petitioners and Opposite Party No.2 and observing that there is a possibility of amicable settlement between them, notice on the question of admission had been issued on 06.01.2023. On 05.05.2023, this Court found that notice was sufficient on the informant-Opposite Party No.2 on 18.01.2023 but none had appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2. Learned State Counsel had been directed to obtain instructions on the said date. Although more than three years have elapsed in the meanwhile, instructions have not yet been obtained by the learned State Counsel.
4. The proceedings in CT Case No.655 of 2022 have not been stayed by this Court. As more than three and half years have elapsed since FIR has been registered and no one appears on behalf of the Petitioner when the matter is called, it can safely be presumed that in the meanwhile CT Case no.655 of 2022 has been disposed of.
5. Hence, the CRLMP is dismissed.
6. Dismissal of the CRLMP will not be a bar for the Petitioners to challenge the proceedings if there is any fresh cause of action.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge RKS Digitally Signed Signed by: RANJAN KUMAR SETHI Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 01-Jul-2026 20:21:02 Signature Not Verified