IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.4616 of 2025 Sohel Alli @ Sohail Ali …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Suryakanta Dwibedi, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Anr. …. Opposite Party(s) Miss Gayatri Patra, ASC Mr. Nirmaya Swain, Adv. CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 20.03.2026 03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. In the present CRLMC, the Petitioner against whom the allegation of keeping physical relationship with the informant giving her false promise of marriage is made, has prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding initiated against him vide G.R. Case No.1010 of 2025 arising out of Bolangir Town P.S. Case No.409 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M, Bolangir. 3. Heard. 4. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2/informant in one tone submit that both the parties are ready for amicable settlement of the dispute involved herein. They also submit that the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 were in love relationship and due to some Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49 Signature Not Verified misunderstanding the F.I.R in question was lodged against the Petitioner. A joint affidavit has been filed to that effect. They, accordingly, pray for allowing the prayer made in this CRLMC. 5. It is well settled that although the offences under Sections 318(2), 81, 296, 115(2), 351(3) & 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 parties have voluntarily arrived at a 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. 6. Considering the contents of the joint affidavit filed by the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 / informant and since the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 were in love relationship and the dispute arose due to some misunderstanding between them which is resolved presently, this Court is of the opinion that no useful Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49 Signature Not Verified 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. The joint affidavit filed by the parties be kept on record. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussion and considerations, the application is allowed. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding initiated against the Petitioner vide G.R Case No.1010 of 2025 arising out of Bolangir Town P.S. Case No.409 of 2025 pending before the Court of learned S.D.J.M, Bolangir stands quashed. 8. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of. 9. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Ayaskanta Designation: Personal Assistant