Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.2309 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010527002026 Santi Harijan ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Sasmita Nanda -versus- State Of Odisha & Anr. ..... Opp. Parties Represented by Adv. – Sasmita Nayak, A.S.C. Bikash Chandra Parija (for O.P. No.2) CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 29.07.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Mr.Bikash Chandra Parija, learned counsel enter appearance on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2 by filing a vakalatnama in Court today and the same be kept on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Party No.1 and learned counsel for the accused-Opposite Party No.2. Perused the CRLMC application as well as the prayer made therein. 4. The informant in Jeypore Mahila P.S Case No.104 dated 03.07.2024, which was registered for alleged commission of an offence under Section 498-A, 494, 34, 506 of IPC, has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing of the criminal proceeding Page 2 of 4. arising out of the aforesaid FIR which corresponds to GR Case No.802 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge (Women's Court), Jeypore. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that the present Petitioner, as informant, lodged the FIR before the Jeypore Mahila PS on 03.07.2024 alleging commission of an offence as has been indicated in the FIR. She further submitted that FIR was lodged due to a matrimonial discord between the Opposite Party No.2-husband and Petitioner-Wife. During the pendency of the present proceeding, the matter was referred to the District Mediation Centre, Koraput, Jeypore for amicable settlement of the dispute. Once before the mediator, the parties agreed to settle the matter amicably on the terms and conditions as has been indicated in the application at Annexure-2. On the basis of the aforesaid compromise, the mediation proceeding became successful and the matter was reverted to the concerned court. 6. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 produced a copy of order dated 15.05.2026 which indicates that the learned CJ (SD) (WC), Jeypore has accepted the mediation report and the findings of the learned mediator that the parties have settled the dispute and have agreed to the conditions as per the memorandum of agreement enclosed with the mediation report. The terms and conditions upon which the dispute was resolved is evident from the joint petition before the learned mediator at Annexure-2. 7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture, contended that since the matter has been resolved amicably and that the parties are residing peacefully together, the further continuance of the present proceeding would be an abuse of the process of court and if Page 3 of 4. it is permitted to continue, the same would never secure the ends of justice. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the criminal proceeding pending against the Opposite Party No.2 be quashed. 8. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2-husband- accused, on the other hand, supported the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner-informant. He further submitted that the matter has been amicably resolved and that both are staying together as husband and wife and living a happy conjugal life and that in the event the criminal proceeding is allowed to continue, the same would cause prejudice to both of them. On such ground, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 supported the quashing of the proceeding. 9. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that she has no specific instruction in the matter. However, from the pleadings it appears that the matter has been amicably resolved through the mechanism of mediation. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that he will have no objection in the event this Court passes any order which would secure the ends of justice. 10. Considering the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, as well as the fact that the matter has been amicably resolved, and taking note of the nature of the allegation, and the fact that the parties are staying together, as has been stated before this Court by the informant-wife-Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2-husband-accused, this Court is inclined to intervene in the matter by invoking its inherent power considering the present Page 4 of 4. case to be one such example of rarest of rare case. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding bearing G.R Case No.802 of 2024 pending in the court of learned CJ (SD) (WC), Koraput, Jeypore, arising out of Jeypore Mahila P.S Case No.104 of 2024 is hereby quashed. 11. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the CRLMC application stands allowed. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer