Orissa High Court
Kedar Sahu & Others vs State Of Odisha & .... Opp. Parties on 2 April, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4741 of 2024
Kedar Sahu & Others .... Petitioners
Mr. Akshaya Ku. Sahoo,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & .... Opp. Parties
Another Mr. S. Moharana, ASC,
Mr. Sarbeswar Sahoo,
Advocate (O.P.No.2)
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order ORDER
No. 02.04.2025
04.
1.
Heard.
2. At the instance of Informant- O.P. No.2, the F.I.R.
in connection with Reamal P.S. Case No.25 of 2020
corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.05 of 2020 came
to be registered against the petitioners for the alleged
commission of offences punishable under Section-
341/294/506/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section-3(l) (r)
(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, pending in the Court of
learned Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Special Court,
Deogarh.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that, the
opposite party No.2 reported the case at Reamal P.S.
alleging therein that, two years ago, the informant
married to the daughter of one Pitabasa Sethi and due
to some domestic misunderstanding, the wife of the
informant left her matrimonial house and started
residing in the house of her parents. It is also alleged
that subsequently the well-wishers of both the families
have decided to resolve the dispute between them by
convening a meeting. It is also alleged that for that
reason, the informant along with others went to the
village of the petitioners where the petitioners along
with one Tankadhar Sahu scolded them in filthy
languages by mentioning his caste. It is also alleged
that they have taken the key of their vehicle and also
forced them to sign in the agreement. Out of fear, they
have agreed to sign in the documents. It is also alleged
that they have threatened to kill them. Hence, the F.I.R.
4. Investigation of the case has already been
completed and the final form of the case has already
been filed on 31.08.2020 and the cognizance of the
offences punishable under Sections 341/294/506/34
of the I.P.C. read with Section-3(l)(r)(s) of the SC/ST
(POA) Act has been taken on 08.09.2020 against the
Petitioners. Before charge is framed and the trial began
parties have entered into settlement, on the basis of
settlement, this petition has been filed.
5. The petitioners and the opposite party no.2 are
present in person in Court today represented by their
counsels. They have also filed the photocopies of their
self-attested Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity,
which are taken on record.
6. The Informant-opposite party No.2 has filed an
affidavit dated 9th February 2025 inter alia stating as
under:-
"4.That the statement of facts:-
(i) that, the deponent is the informant in
connection with Reamal P.S. Case No-
25/2020, which was registered against the
present petitioners and others in an
offence U/s- 341/294/506/34 of the I.P.C,
r/w section- 3(l)(r) (s) of the S.C./S.T (P.A.)
Act which is corresponding to Spl. G.R.
Case No. 05/2020 pending before the
learned Sessions Judge- Cum- Judge
Special Court, Deogarh.
(ii) That, after lodging of the F.I.R. and during
the course of investigation the matter has
amicably settled between us, for that
reason I am no more interested to
prosecute with this case any further.
(iii) That, soon after lodging of the F.I.R., the
well-wishers have taken steps for
compromise between us and accordingly
my wife joined with me and in the
meantime she had already died.
(iv) That, due to some mis-understanding the
F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioners
and others and due to compromise
between us, I don't want to prosecute the
case any further.
(v) That, without any fear, favour and
coercion, the informant swear this affidavit
on his own sweet will.
(i) That the deponent further respectfully
states here that in the meantime they have
restored their cordial relationship and if
the proceeding will be continue, then their
relationship will be at a stake".
7. On the query from the Court, the opposite party
No.2 being present in Court submits that there was
misunderstanding and due to sudden provocation, she
had filed the case. On the intervention of the well-
wishers and the village gentry, the dispute has been
settled between the parties. Hence, she joins with the
petitioner seeking quashing of the entire criminal case
initiated by her against the petitioner.
8. Mrs. Moharana, learned Additional Standing
Counsel appearing for the opposite party No.1-State
and Mr. Sarbeswar Sahoo, learned Counsel for the
opposite party No.2 submit that since the dispute has
been settled between the parties and the opposite party
No.2 has filed an affidavit before this Court, therefore,
there is no legal impediment in quashing the F.I.R.
9. Regard being had to the submissions made above,
and the fact that the parties have settled their dispute,
I am inclined to allow the present petition. In the fact
scenario of the present case, subjecting the petitioners
to the rigors of trial at this stage would be a futile
exercise. The present case is squarely covered by the
judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, reported
in 2012 (10) SCC 303; B.S. Joshi & others v. State
of Haryana & another, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675
and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia & another v.
Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and others,
reported in AIR 1988 SC 709, therefore, the petition
deserves merit.
10. Taking into consideration the aforementioned
judgments, the facts of the case and submissions made
at the Bar, the F.I.R. in connection with Reamal P.S.
Case No.25 of 2020 corresponding to Special G.R. Case
No.05 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Sessions
Judge-cum-Judge, Special Court, Deogarh and the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the
petitioners are quashed.
11. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Narayan
Designation: Personal Assistant
