p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.1516 of 2026 Truptimayee Sahu …. Petitioner(s) Ms. Sasmita Nanda, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Anr. …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC CORAM: HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. 01. ORDER 11.05.2026 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. By filing the present CRLMC, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR and the entire criminal proceedings initiated against him in connection with Boudh P.S. Case No.10 of 2024(CIS No.14/2024), corresponding to C.T. Case No.16 of 2024, pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Boudh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the parties have appeared before the Boudh Mediation Centre on the 19.03.2026 and they have discussed the entire disputes in detail before the mediator. The mediation became successful. The contents of the mediation report is extracted hereinbelow: - “xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx During mediation, both parties appeared and participated in the mediation proceedings. After detailed discussion and Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 15-May-2026 18:14:59 Signature Not Verified p. 2 intervention, both parties have amicably resolved their disputes and have agreed to resume cohabitation and lead a peaceful conjugal life. Hence, the mediation is successful between the parties. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that, in the interregnum, the dispute between the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 has been amicably resolved. They are now staying together. 5. Learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2, on the other hand, confirms the factum of settlement and submits that Opposite Party No.2 does not intend to proceed further with the case. 6. Learned counsel for the State has no objection if the proceeding is quashed in view of the settlement between the Petitioner and Opposite Party No.2. 7. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the contents of the mediation report brought on record and the nature of the dispute, this Court is satisfied that the parties have voluntarily resolved their disputes amicably. Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 15-May-2026 18:14:59 Signature Not Verified p. 3 8. The Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab1, held that criminal proceedings involving offences of a personal nature can be quashed where the parties have settled the matter amicably. 9. Further in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.2, the Supreme Court laid down guidelines for quashing proceedings on the basis of compromise and observed that such power should be exercised where the dispute is essentially private and continuation of proceedings would be futile. 10. Similarly, in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors.3, the Supreme Court reiterated that in cases having overwhelmingly civil or personal flavour, the High Court may quash proceedings if the parties have settled the dispute, provided the offences are not heinous or serious in nature affecting society at large. 11. In the present case, considering the nature of the dispute and the fact that the parties have amicably settled their differences and are living peacefully, continuation of the criminal proceeding would be an exercise in futility and would not serve any useful purpose. 12. Accordingly, in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 528 of BNSS (erstwhile Section of the 482 Cr.P.C.), 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303 2 (2014) 6 SCC 466 3 (2019) 5 SCC 688 Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 15-May-2026 18:14:59 Signature Not Verified p. 4 this Court deems it fit and proper to quash the criminal proceeding initiated against the Petitioner in connection with Boudh P.S. Case No.10 of 2024(CIS No.14/2024), corresponding to C.T. Case No.16 of 2024, pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Boudh. 13. The CRLMC stands allowed and disposed of. 14. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 15. A copy of the order be communicated to the learned trial Court for information. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Gitanjali