IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3529 of 2025 Dipu @ Dinabandhu Singh …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Smruti Ranjan Rao, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Anr. …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Amitav Pradhan, ASC CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 29.01.2026 03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. In filing this CRLMC, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 30.07.2025 passed by the learned S.D.J.M, Angul in G.R. Case No.275 of 2025 corresponding to C.T. Special Case No.9 of 2025 arising out of Bantala P.S. Case No.73 of 2025. 3. Heard. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that though the above noted criminal proceeding has been initiated based on the F.I.R lodged by the victim, the Petitioner is no way connected to the offences alleged against him. He has been entangled in this case only on suspicion. He further contends that the Petitioner has never abused the victim nor has he used any filthy languages towards the victim. Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 02-Feb-2026 18:41:08 Signature Not Verified He, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this CRLMC. 5. In his opposition, learned counsel for the State submits that upon lodging of the F.I.R since the case has been turned to the offences punishable under Sections 109(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act read with Sections 3(2)(v) of the S.C and S.T (POA) Act and transmitted to the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Angul for necessary consideration vide order dated 30.07.2025 which is impugned herein, there is no compelling reasons to quash the entire proceeding at this stage. He further contends that the truth will come only after conclusion of the trial. He, accordingly, prays for dismissal of this CRLMC. 6. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and since the case pertaining to the offences punishable under Sections 109(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act read with Sections 3(2)(v) of the S.C and S.T (POA) Act has been transmitted to the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Angul, this Court is of the view that whether the Petitioner has committed any such offences or not, can only be answered after conclusion of the trial. It is also well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 02-Feb-2026 18:41:08 Signature Not Verified Section 482 of the Cr.P.C cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C at the pre- trial stage should not be used in a routine manner, but it has to be used sparingly only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuation of the criminal proceedings. This Court, in the present context, declines to quash the entire above noted criminal proceeding initiated against the Petitioner. 7. This CRLMC is, accordingly, dismissed. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Ayaskanta Designation: Personal Assistant