Page 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.1458 of 2026 (In the matter of an application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973). Sukumar Pattnaik @ Sonu @ Sukumar Pattnanyak …. Petitioner(s) -versus- State of Odisha & Anr …. Opposite Party (s) Advocates appeared in the case through Hybrid Mode: For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Sahoo, Adv. For Opposite Party (s) : Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI DATE OF HEARING:-12.05.2026 DATE OF JUDGMENT:-25.06.2026 Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J. 1. The Petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking exercise of the extraordinary powers vested therein. The present petition has been instituted with a prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Balangir Town P.S. Case No. 184 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 523 of 2020, including the final form dated 29.06.2020 and the order dated Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 2 08.07.2020 whereby cognizance of the alleged offences was taken by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balangir. 2. The Petitioner contends that the continuation of the criminal proceeding is legally unsustainable, devoid of the essential ingredients of the alleged offences, and amounts to an abuse of the process of the Court, thereby warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction to secure the ends of justice. I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE: 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: (i) As borne out from the records of the case, the State Government, in the wake of the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, had imposed stringent lockdown and containment measures throughout the State of Odisha in order to prevent the spread of the virus and safeguard public health. (ii) In furtherance of the said objective, comprehensive regulatory directions and restrictions were issued vide Order No. 8980/H&FW dated 23.03.2020 by the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Odisha. The said order mandated strict compliance with lockdown protocols and movement restrictions across the State, and any violation thereof was liable to attract penal consequences under the applicable provisions of law. (iii) On 15.04.2020 at about 4:00 P.M., while police personnel attached to Balangir Town Police Station were conducting routine patrolling within the town limits for the purpose of Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 3 enforcing lockdown restrictions, maintaining public order, and ensuring compliance with social distancing and public health protocols, they allegedly noticed several individuals moving on public roads during the period of lockdown. Upon intercepting and verifying the said persons, the patrolling officers found that none of them was carrying any valid movement pass, emergency authorization, or other permission permitting travel during the lockdown period. (iv) It was further noticed that the said individuals were not wearing face masks, which had been mandated under the prevailing governmental directions issued to contain the spread of COVID- 19. The police authorities treated such conduct as being in contravention of the lockdown and containment measures then in force. (v) Treating the presence of the said persons on public roads during the lockdown period as a violation of the restrictions imposed by the Government, the police personnel apprehended seventeen individuals from different locations within the town limits of Balangir and seized the motor vehicles allegedly used by them under proper seizure lists. (vi) Thereafter, a common First Information Report was lodged on 15.04.2020, which was registered as Balangir Town P.S. Case No. 184 of 2020, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 188, 269, 270, 271, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the seventeen persons. In the said F.I.R., the present Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 4 Petitioner was arrayed as one of the accused persons and was shown at Serial No. 4 in the list of accused. (vii) Upon completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the final form on 29.06.2020, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 269, 270, 271, 34, and 217 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, upon perusal of the police papers and the materials collected during investigation, the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balangir, by order dated 08.07.2020, was pleased to take cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 269, 270, 271, and 34 of the IPC and proceeded in accordance with law. (viii) It further appears from the record that, despite the lapse of more than six years from the date of registration of the case, the proceeding has remained at a preliminary stage and has not advanced substantially towards trial. According to the Petitioner, the matter continues to linger at the stage of securing the appearance of the accused persons, and no effective progress has been made towards commencement of the trial. Contending that the continued pendency of the criminal proceeding arising out of an alleged violation of lockdown regulations has cast a prolonged shadow over his personal and professional life, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceeding and other consequential reliefs. Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 5 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court by way of the present criminal appeal. II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER: 4. The learned counsel for the Appellant respectfully and earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions: (i) The Petitioner submits that the materials collected during investigation, even if accepted in their entirety, do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 269, 270, or 271 of the IPC. It is contended that the prosecution has failed to place any material on record to demonstrate that the Petitioner was suffering from COVID-19, was suspected to be infected, or had otherwise acted in a manner likely to spread an infection dangerous to life. (ii) It is further argued that no medical examination of the Petitioner was conducted, nor was any clinical, diagnostic, or laboratory report obtained by the investigating agency to establish that he was infected with the coronavirus or was a potential carrier thereof at the relevant point of time. (iii) According to the Petitioner, in the absence of any such foundational medical evidence, the statutory ingredients required to attract Sections 269 and 270 of the IPC remain wholly unsubstantiated. Learned counsel submits that a private individual cannot be presumed, merely on account of his presence in a public place during the lockdown period, to be a Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 6 source or carrier of an infectious disease dangerous to life. On such premises, it is contended that the continuation of the criminal proceeding under the aforesaid provisions amounts to a misuse of the criminal process and is liable to be quashed. (iv) The Petitioner further contends that the invocation of Section 34 of the IPC is wholly misconceived and devoid of any factual foundation. It is submitted that the Petitioner was allegedly travelling alone and was intercepted independently by the police at a location distinct from those where the other accused persons were apprehended. According to the Petitioner, there is no material whatsoever in the F.I.R., charge-sheet, or the case diary to suggest the existence of any prior concert, meeting of minds, or pre-arranged plan among the seventeen accused persons. (v) It is argued that the essential requirement for the application of Section 34 of the IPC is the existence of a common intention shared by multiple persons to commit a particular criminal act. However, in the present case, the accused persons were allegedly found at different places within the town and were apprehended independently of one another. In the absence of any allegation or material indicating coordinated action, collective participation, or a common design, the mere fact that several individuals were found outside during the lockdown period cannot, by itself, attract the principle of joint liability embodied under Section 34 of the IPC. Learned counsel Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 7 therefore submits that the incorporation of Section 34 in the present proceeding is legally unsustainable and liable to be struck down. (vi) The Petitioner further submits that the inclusion of Section 217 of the IPC in the final form is a patent manifestation of non- application of mind on the part of the investigating agency. It is contended that Section 217 IPC specifically pertains to the misconduct of a public servant who knowingly disobeys a direction of law with the intent of saving a person from punishment or protecting property from forfeiture. The very language of the provision makes it abundantly clear that it is applicable exclusively to a public servant acting in the discharge of official duties. (vii) According to the Petitioner, he is admittedly neither a public servant nor a person holding any public office, but a private citizen and student. Consequently, the foundational requirement for attracting the offence under Section 217 IPC is wholly absent in the present case. Learned counsel argues that the incorporation of the said provision in the final form, despite the Petitioner's undisputed status as a private individual, demonstrates a complete lack of due application of mind by the investigating agency and casts serious doubt on the legality and sustainability of the prosecution. On such grounds, it is contended that the continuation of the proceeding would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 8 (viii) The Petitioner further contends that the very initiation of the criminal proceeding under Section 188 of the IPC is legally unsustainable in view of the express bar contained in Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the said provision prohibits any Court from taking cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 188 IPC except upon a written complaint made by the public servant concerned whose lawful order is alleged to have been disobeyed, or by some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. (ix) According to the Petitioner, the present case was set into motion through a police F.I.R. and not on the basis of any complaint contemplated under Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. It is argued that the statutory requirement is mandatory in nature and constitutes a jurisdictional precondition for prosecution under Section 188 IPC. Consequently, the registration of the F.I.R. and the initiation of criminal action for the alleged violation of the lockdown order, without a valid complaint from the competent public authority, are stated to be contrary to law and void ab initio. Learned counsel therefore submits that the foundational defect goes to the root of the matter and renders the prosecution legally untenable. (x) The Petitioner further submits that the continuation of the present criminal proceeding, arising out of an alleged violation of lockdown regulations during the extraordinary circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, has subjected the Petitioner to Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 9 prolonged uncertainty and prejudice. It is contended that, despite the lapse of more than six years, the case has remained at a nascent stage without any meaningful progress towards trial. According to the Petitioner, the pendency of the proceeding has adversely affected his academic, professional, and employment prospects, while yielding no corresponding public interest or prosecutorial purpose. (xi) It is further argued that the allegations against the Petitioner neither disclose any actual transmission of disease nor indicate any tangible harm caused to the community. In such circumstances, the continued prosecution of a minor and stale proceeding is stated to be disproportionate and contrary to the interests of justice. Learned counsel therefore submits that allowing the matter to remain pending indefinitely would result in an unnecessary expenditure of judicial time and resources, and that the proceedings deserve to be quashed in exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to prevent abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice. III. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY: 5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Opposite Party earnestly made the submission that the present CRLMC is not maintainable before this Court and deserves to be rejected in limine. (i) The Opp. Party submits that the events in question occurred during the extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, when stringent lockdown measures Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 10 and public safety protocols had been imposed by the Government to contain the spread of a highly contagious and potentially life-threatening disease. It is contended that the regulatory directions and restrictions issued by the competent authorities were intended to safeguard public health and maintain public order during a period of grave national concern. Therefore, strict compliance with such directives was imperative, and any alleged violation thereof warranted appropriate legal action in accordance with law. (ii) Learned counsel for the Opp. Party further contends that movement on public streets without valid authorization and in disregard of the mandatory health protocols, including the requirement of wearing face masks, during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic constituted conduct fraught with serious risks to public health. (iii) It is submitted that, at a time when the authorities were striving to contain the spread of a highly contagious disease, such actions had the potential to facilitate community transmission and undermine the effectiveness of the containment measures imposed by the Government. According to the State, the alleged conduct of the accused persons cannot be viewed in isolation but must be assessed in the backdrop of the prevailing public health emergency and the imperative need for strict adherence to the regulatory directives then in force. Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 11 (iv) The Opp. Party further contends that the materials collected during investigation, including the reports prepared by the patrolling police personnel at the spot, prima facie disclose the commission of offences punishable under Sections 269, 270, and 271 of the IPC. (v) It is contended that the field reports and contemporaneous records indicate that the accused persons were found moving in public places in violation of the prevailing lockdown and public health directives, thereby exposing themselves and others to the risk of transmission of an infectious disease. (vi) According to the State, such materials are sufficient at this stage to attract the ingredients of the aforesaid offences and justify the continuation of the criminal proceeding, leaving the ultimate determination of guilt or innocence to be decided upon appreciation of evidence during trial. (vii) The Opp. Party submits that upon completion of the investigation, the final form was duly submitted and the learned court below, being satisfied that a prima facie case was made out, validly took cognizance of the offences alleged. (viii) It is contended that the pleas advanced by the Petitioner regarding the absence of criminal intent, lack of medical examination, or insufficiency of evidence to establish the ingredients of the offences are essentially matters touching upon appreciation of evidence and determination of disputed questions of fact. Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 12 (ix) According to the State, such issues cannot be conclusively adjudicated in proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and are required to be examined by the trial court upon a full- fledged evaluation of the evidence led by the parties. It is therefore urged that the present petition, being founded on disputed factual assertions, does not warrant interference at the threshold stage and is liable to be dismissed. IV. COURT’S REASONING AND ANALYSIS: 6. Heard Learned Counsel for parties and perused the documents placed before this Court. 7. Upon a careful scrutiny of the allegations and the materials placed on record, this Court finds that the prosecution has failed to disclose how the alleged conduct of the Petitioner either caused, or was reasonably likely to cause, the mischief contemplated under the penal provisions invoked. The statutory provisions in question are not intended to criminalize every technical or trivial deviation from an administrative direction; rather, they are designed to address conduct which poses a real and appreciable threat to public order, public health, or public safety. 8. In the case at hand, no material has been brought on record to indicate that the Petitioner was infected with COVID-19, was a carrier of the disease, or had engaged in any act creating a tangible risk of transmission. Equally, the prosecution materials do not disclose circumstances demonstrating the degree of disobedience or endangerment envisaged by the provisions under which cognizance Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 13 has been taken. In the absence of any foundational material establishing either actual harm or a reasonable likelihood of such harm, the essential ingredients of the alleged offences remain conspicuously absent. 9. This Court is of the considered view that mere suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of legal proof. A citizen cannot be subjected to criminal prosecution on the basis of conjectures or presumptions alone unless the allegations are supported by cogent materials disclosing the essential ingredients of the offence alleged. The criminal law demands a demonstrable factual foundation before an individual can be compelled to face the rigours of a criminal trial. 10. Equally, this Court is mindful of the fact that the criminal law, though an indispensable instrument for maintaining public order and enforcing legal obligations, is a coercive mechanism that must be invoked with due restraint and only in circumstances where the statutory ingredients of the alleged offence are demonstrably satisfied. Criminal prosecution cannot be permitted to operate as a punitive measure in the absence of a clear legal foundation. 11. Where the materials on record fail to disclose the essential prerequisites mandated by the statute, or where the alleged conduct falls at the periphery of the mischief which the legislature intended to prevent, the continuation of criminal proceedings would be manifestly disproportionate to the nature of the allegations. In such circumstances, compelling an individual to undergo the rigours of a Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 14 criminal trial would amount to an unwarranted misuse of the judicial process and would defeat, rather than advance, the ends of justice. 12. This Court is therefore of the considered view that where the foundational ingredients of the offence are conspicuously absent, the inherent jurisdiction of the Court ought to be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice. 13. It is further noteworthy that if the allegations were indeed of such grave and serious magnitude as contended by the prosecution, the investigating agency ought to have proceeded with due promptitude and diligence to bring the matter to its logical conclusion within a reasonable period. However, in the present case, the proceeding has remained pending for nearly six years without any substantial progress. Such inordinate and unexplained delay not only undermines the efficacy of the prosecution but also causes undue prejudice to the Petitioner, who continues to remain under the shadow of criminal proceedings for an indefinite period. 14. In these circumstances, the prolonged pendency of the case, coupled with the absence of sufficient foundational material to substantiate the allegations, militates against the principles of fairness and speedy justice enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 15. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the continuation of the prosecution would amount to an unwarranted exercise in criminal process. The charges levelled against the Petitioner, therefore, cannot be sustained in law and are liable to be dropped. Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15 Signature Not Verified Page 15 V. CONCLUSION: 16. In view of the foregoing discussion, and upon an anxious, comprehensive, and careful consideration of the facts, circumstances, and materials available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the continuation of the criminal proceeding against the present Petitioner would serve no useful purpose and would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. The allegations contained in the F.I.R., the materials collected during investigation, and the cognizance order taken by the learned court below fail to disclose the essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the Petitioner. 17. Accordingly, this Court deems it fit and proper, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Balangir Town P.S. Case No. 184 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 523 of 2020, including the final form dated 29.06.2020 and the order of cognizance dated 08.07.2020 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balangir. Consequently, all charges levelled against the Petitioner stand dropped and the Petitioner is discharged from the said proceeding. 18. Accordingly, the CRLMC stands allowed. 19. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated 25th June, 2026/ CUTTACK