p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.5186 of 2025 Biranchi Sahoo …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Sambeet Pattanayak, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Anr. …. Opposite Party(s) Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC Mr. S. Rout, S.P. Moharana, Adv. (for O.P. No.2) CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. 04. ORDER 23.02.2026 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. In filing the present CRLMC, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings initiated against him vide Konark P.S. Case No.98 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.382 of 2025, pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Konark. 3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that at the intervention of the village gentries, the Petitioner and Opposite Party No.2 have settled their dispute and they are leaving peacefully in the locality without any ill-feeling towards each other and Opposite Party No.2 does not want to proceed further in the present case. Therefore, he submits Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 24-Feb-2026 10:29:43 Signature Not Verified p. 2 that as the matter has been compromised between the parties, continuance of the criminal proceedings is an abuse of process of law and no fruitful purpose will be served keeping the matter pending. 5. Learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.2 supports the submissions advanced on behalf of the Petitioner and confirms that the dispute has been amicably settled and that Opposite Party No.2 has no objection if the criminal proceeding is quashed. 6. It appears from the case records that, a joint affidavit has been filed by the Petitioner and Opposite Party No.2, wherein the relevant paragraphs are reproduced below: “…. 3. That in the meantime the parties have sorted out their differences at the intervention of the village gentries and leading happy social life in the village having no ill feeling towards each other. 4. That in view of the compromise between the parties, the informant do not want to proceed further in the present case and he does not have any objection if the criminal prosecution in the present case be quashed. 5. That since the parties have sorted out their differences and also leaving happily and peacefully in the village, the present case may be allowed and the entire criminal prosecution be quashed.” p. 3 7. The Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another1, has held that in appropriate cases involving matrimonial disputes or private disputes of personal nature, where the parties have amicably settled their differences, the High Court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings in order to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of Court. 8. This Court has also followed the said principle in Lokanath @ Anadi Sethi and four others v. State of Orissa and four others2, and Sansuri alias Khageswar Lenka and another v. State of Orissa and Another3, and has held that where the dispute has been settled and the parties, continuation of the criminal proceeding would serve no fruitful purpose. 9. In view of the aforesaid discussions and considerations and taking into account the ratio laid down in the aforesaid cases, the application is allowed. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings initiated against the Petitioner vide Konark P.S. Case No.98 dated 16.06.2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.382 of 2025, pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Konark, stands quashed. 10. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of. 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303 2 2014 (II) OLR 29 3 2014 (II) OLR 452 p. 4 11. Pending application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 12. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated. 13. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Sipun