Orissa High Court
Rabindra Kumar vs State Of Odisha & Another .... Opp. ... on 19 February, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4947 of 2023
Rabindra Kumar .... Petitioners
Samantaray & others Mr. Kabiraj
Pradhan,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opp. Parties
Mr.S.J.Mohanty,
ASC and
Mr.Deepak
Kumar
Mohapatra,
Advocate for
O.P. No.2
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order ORDER
No. 19.02.2025
11.
1.
Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the
F.I.R. in connection with 1.C.C. Case No.34 of 2002
came to be registered against the petitioners pending
in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Ranpur.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that due to
the political rivalry, all the petitioners entered into the
house of the complainant and destroyed all the
household articles and assaulted the complainant and
his family members. It is alleged that the petitioners
took away the household articles of the complainant.
Hence, the F.I.R.
4. The parties have settled their dispute. On the basis
of the settlement terms, they seek indulgence of this
Court for quashing of the criminal prosecution.
5. It is stated at the Bar that the petitioner No.1 has
already died. This Court vide order dated 30.01.2025
has passed the following order:
"1. Pursuant to the last order dated 03.01.2025,
Mr. Biswal, learned counsel for the State received
instruction dated 14.01.2025 from the IIC,
Chandpur Police Station, which reads as under:-
"With reference to the subject cited above I
am to submit that I conducted enquiry in the
village Ostapada under Chandpur PS it was
ascertained that they have compromised
the cases arising out of CRLMC
No.4945/2023, CRLMC No. 4947/2023,
CRLMC No. 4948/2023 in connection with
ICC Case No.47/2002, 34/2002 &
48/2002. A copy of the affidavit in
connection above noted CRLMC have been
produced before me."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner taking me to
the order dated 20.02.2024 passed by this Court
submits that in all the three cases the petitioners
are the villagers. Therefore, it would be practically
not possible to make the petitioners appear before
this Court and for that reason this Court vide order
dated 20.02.2024 directed the petitioners to appear
before the I.O. and the I.O. is supposed to verify the
factum of settlement. The operative part of the
order dated 20.02.2024 reads as under:-
"3. The IIC, Chandpur Police Station is directed
to verify the facts and furnish instruction to
Mr. Maharaj, learned Additional Standing
Counsel for the State by the next date of
hearing."
3. In view of the aforementioned, learned counsel
for the petitioner submits that the informant in all
the three cases would be appearing on the next
date of hearing.
4. List this matter on 11.02.2025."
6. Pursuant to the aforementioned order, the IIC,
Chandapur P.S. has submitted the following report
dated 28.02.2024 which reads as under:
"Most respectfully with reference to the CRLMC
Number and subject cited above I have the honour to
report that on dt. 26.02.2024 the petitioners in the
above referred case appeared before me and
submitted joint affidavit filed by the petitioners and
opposite party. During verification the opposite party
No.02 in CRLMC No.4945/2023 namely Damayanti
Parida (49 years), W/o. Bhagirathi Parida of Vill-
Ostapada, PS- Chandapur, Dist- Nayagarh, in
CRLMC No.4947/2023 Pratima Mandhata, W/o.
Kishore Chandra Mandhata of Vill- Ostapada, PS-
Chandapur, Dist- Nayagarh and in CRLMC
No.4948/2023 namely Manorama Parida (51 years),
W/o. Sarbeswar Parida of vill- Ostapada, PS-
Chandapur, Dist- Nayagarh stated that they are
agree in all the three matters to settle their dispute
amicably. On verification of the affidavit submitted
by the petitioners in all the three matters and the
Aadhaar cards submitted by them, most of the
petitioners names and titles have not matched.
Further two petitioners namely (1) Santosh
Samantary (41 years), S/o. Pankaj Samantaray in
CRLMC No.4947/2023 and (2) Ranjan @ Tuku
Samantaray, S/o. Kamal Samantaray in CRLMC
No.4947/2023 both of Vill- Ostapada, PS-
Chandapur, Dist- Nayagarh have not appeared
before me. Further on verification one Sada Sahoo
(45 years), S/o. Kambhu Sahoo of vill- Ostapada,
PS- Chandapur, Dist- Nayagarh died on 01.02.204
due to heart attack. As the name mentioned in
affidavit and Aadhaar card has not matched. I
directed the petitioners to submit their affidavit by
mentioning their nick name in the affidavit. Hence I
am unable to submit my complete instructions."
Subsequent thereto, the IIC, Chandapur P.S. has also
submitted another report dated14.01.2025, which
reads thus:
"With reference to the subject cited above I am to
submit that, I conducted enquiry in the village
Ostapada under Chandapur PS it was ascertained
that they have compromised the cases arising out of
CRLMC No.4945/2023, CRLMC No.4947/2023,
CRLMC No.4948/2023 in connection with ICC Case
No.47/2002, 34/2002 & 48/2002. A copy of
affidavit in connection above noted CRLMC have
been produced before me."
7. On the query from the Court, Mr. Mohanty,
learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State
submits that the IIC has verified the factum of
settlement. All the parties except the petitioner No.11
have already appeared before the IIC, Chandapur P.S.
and the IIC, Chandpur P.S. has verified the affidavit
and the documetns placed before him.
8. Some of the petitioners and the opposite party
No.2/the informant are present in the Court today
being represented by their respective counsels and
identified by them. They have also filed the
photocopies of their self-attested Aadhaar Cards to
establish their identity, which are taken on record.
9. Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel
appearing for the opposite party No.1-State submits
that, the parties have settled their dispute and they
have filed the affidavit in that regard. Therefore, there
is no legal impediment in quashing the F.I.R.
10. 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.
11. Taking into consideration the aforementioned
judgments, the facts of the case and submissions
made at the Bar, the F.I.R. in connection with 1.C.C.
Case No.34 of 2002 pending in the Court of learned
J.M.F.C., Ranpur and the consequential proceedings
arising therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed.
12. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Subhasis
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 20-Feb-2025 18:52:20
