IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRA No.143 of 1990 Banshidhar Rout …. Appellant Mr. Pranaba Kumar Samantaray, Advocate -versus- Dhaneswar Swain and another …. Respondents Mr. Ajit Kumar Raut, Advocate for Respondent No.2 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. 06. ORDER 30.04.2026 1. Pursuant to the notices to the appellant as well as the respondents issued through the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kendrapara in compliance of the order dated 20th March, 2026 of this Court, Mr. Pranaba Kumar Samantaray, learned counsel appeared for the appellant and Mr. Ajit Kumar Raut learned counsel appeared for respondent no.2 by filing Vakalatanama respectively. 2. It is submitted that the appellant filed a complaint in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kendrapara on the allegation that on 04.01.1987 while he was returning from Marshaghai Market with some new cloths, the respondents restrained him in front of their house and assaulting him abused with filthy language and snatched away the cloths. On the complaint, registered as I C.C. Case No.6 of 1987, being filed before the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kendrapara, cognizance was taken under Section 323 and Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the case got transferred subsequently to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class for disposal. The respondents faced trial and were found guilty of offence under Section 323 and 379 and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months on each count vide Judgment dated 18.01.1988. 2.1. Criminal Appeal bearing No.14 of 1988 against said Judgment being preferred, the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack, allowed it. 2.2. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 31.08.1989 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, acquitting the respondents, the present criminal appeal has been filed. 3. Today, when the matter was taken up, learned counsel appearing for respective parties in unison submitted that during pendency of this Criminal Appeal, respondent no.1 has expired. 3.1. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that during pendency of this Criminal Appeal, the matter has been settled between the parties and, therefore, the appellant does not wish to proceed with the matter any further. Therefore, he prayed for leave to withdraw this instant criminal appeal and a memo to this effect has been filed in Court today, which is taken on record. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 raised no objection. 4. In view of such conceded position, there is no point in proceeding with the Criminal Appeal, hence, the same stands disposed of as not pressed. (M.S. Raman) Judge Laxmikant Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER