Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 22334 (ORI)

INFORMANT/VICTIM v. STATE OF ODISHA

CRLMC/1784/2026 · 2026-06-25

S K Panigrahi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No. 1784 of 2026 Informant/Victim ..…... Petitioner (s) Ms. Sasmita Nanda, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha & Anr. ……. Opposite Party (s) Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC Mr. Bikash Ch. Parija, Adv. (for O.P.2) CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER 25.06.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The Petitioner has filed this CRLMC with a prayer to quash the FIR as well as entire proceeding initiated against her in Boudh P.S. Case No.143 of 2020, corresponding to C.T. Case No.768 of 2020 pending before the Court of J.M.F.C., Harabhanga. 4. Learned counsel for both the parties submits that in the meantime, the matter has amicably been settled between the parties through the Mediation held on 07.02.2026. 5. The relevant portion of the Mediation Report is extracted hereunder: Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 29-Jun-2026 11:12:16 Signature Not Verified p. 2 “xxx xxx xxx 5. Terms and Conditions 1. The accused shall not assault the complainant in future. 2. The accused shall not abused in filthy languages in future. Both the parties have mutually agreed that they will not claim any rights over the properties and other assets in the name of either parties or both the parties have agreed and consented that they will not raise any manner of rights on many movable or immovable properties owned and occupied by them. All the disputes between the Petitioner and respondent herein have settled as full and final as mentioned in the above terms and conditions and therefore Petitioner and Respondent have agreed that they will not file any criminal or civil complaint against each other for any such relief in future with respect to their martial rights. In view of the aforesaid settlement agreement entered between the parties herein pray that sufficient orders may be passed as stated in this settlement agreement in each case without any further cost from either side.” 6. Considering the contents of the Mediation Report held on 07.02.2026 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 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303 2 2014 (II) OLR 29 3 2014 (II) OLR 452 Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 29-Jun-2026 11:12:16 Signature Not Verified p. 3 the criminal proceeding in the aforesaid case as it will only lead to abuse the process of law. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussion and considerations, the application is allowed. Accordingly, the FIR in Boudh P.S. Case No.143 of 2020, corresponding to C.T. Case No.768 of 2020 pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Harabhanga, is hereby quashed. As a necessary corollary, the entire criminal proceeding initiated against the Petitioner in the aforesaid case, stands quashed. 8. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of. 9. ( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Murmu Designation: P.A.