p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3473 of 2025 Susil Kumar Das & Ors. …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh Behera, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Anr. …. Opposite Party(s) Smt. Sarita Moharana, ASC Mr. Abhishek Mohanty, Adv. 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 the present CRLMC, the Petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding initiated against them in connection with G.R. Case No.1088/2025 arising out of Cuttack Sadar P.S. Case No.544 of 2025 pending before the Court of learned J.M.F.C (R), Cuttack. 3. Heard. 4. It is well settled that although the offences under Sections 296, 351(2) & 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita are non-compoundable, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., is not denuded of power to quash the criminal proceeding where the dispute is essentially private and matrimonial in nature and the parties have voluntarily arrived at a Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 29-Jan-2026 18:48:40 Signature Not Verified p. 2 genuine and complete settlement. The underlying object of such exercise is to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. Where the continuation of the criminal proceeding, despite an amicable settlement, would serve no fruitful purpose and would only perpetuate bitterness between the parties, the High Court would be justified in interdicting the prosecution, particularly when the informant herself has unequivocally expressed her consent for such quashing. 4. Considering the contents of the joint affidavit filed by the Petitioners and the Opposite Party No.2/ informant - victim and following the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another1, and two other reported cases of this Court in Lokanath @ Anadi Sethi and four others v. State of Orissa and four others2, and Sansuri alias Khageswar Lenka and another – vrs.- State of Orissa and Another3, wherein this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served in allowing such proceedings to continue the criminal proceeding in the aforesaid case as it will only lead to abuse the process of law. 5. In view of the aforesaid discussion and considerations, the application is allowed. Accordingly, the entire criminal 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303 2 2014 (II) OLR 29 3 2014 (II) OLR 452 Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 29-Jan-2026 18:48:40 Signature Not Verified p. 3 proceeding initiated against the Petitioners vide G.R. Case No.1088 of 2025 arising out of Cuttack Sadar P.S. No.544 of 2025 pending before the Court of the learned J.M.F.C (R), Cuttack stands quashed. However, this Court deems it apposite to impose a cost of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) on the informant-victim / Opposite Party No.2 for wasting the valuable time of the Police Department. The said cost shall be deposited in favour of the “Odisha Police Welfare Fund” within fifteen working days hence. 6. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of. 7. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Ayaskanta Designation: Personal Assistant