Orissa High Court
Soumya Ranjan Dalei And vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 19 February, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.3402 of 2024
Soumya Ranjan Dalei and .... Petitioner(s)
another
Dr. B. K. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Party(s)
Ms. S. Moharana, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
19.02.2025
Order No.
03. 1. Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. dated
03.02.2024 in Kharbelnagar P.S. Case No.62 of 2024 came to be
registered against the petitioners for the alleged commission of the
offences under Sections 341/323/325/307/34 of I.P.C. On the
ground of settlement, the petitioners are seeking quashing of the
F.I.R and consequential proceedings.
3. The allegation against the petitioners in the F.I.R. is that,
on 03.02.2024 at about 10.00 P.M., the informant lodged a written
report alleging therein that on that day, while he was guarding the
shoes and sandals in front of Ram Mandir, the petitioners have
assaulted him by means of stone, as a result of which, he sustained
bleeding injuries on his head. Hence, this case.
4. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed on
27.02.2024 for alleged commission of offences under Sections
341/323/307/34 of I.P.C. against the petitioners. Before the trial
commenced, the parties have entered into a settlement.
5. The petitioners and the opposite party No.2 are present in
the Court and being represented and identified by their counsels.
They have also filed self-attested copy of their Aadhaar Cards to
establish their identity, which are taken on record.
6. The petitioners and the opposite party No.2 have also filed
an affidavit dated 05.03.2024 inter alia stating as under:-
"We both the parties swearing this affidavit that, we
belong to the same area of the aforesaid address. Due to
some misunderstanding we had filed in the process got
injured and the First party had lodged an FIR in the
Kharabelanagar Police station vide Ps case No.62 dated
03.02.2024 under Section 307, 341, 334 and 34 of IPC
and same has been converted into C.T. case No.203 of
2024 which is pending before the SDJM, Bhubaneswar
now we both the parties leaving in peacefully manner and
compromised the matter amicably in presence of witness
with a promise from both side the we would not repeated
the same in future as we both have been in good terms
since the issue.
In further I first party (Informant) declared that if the
second parties will quashed the matter in legal process I
will no objection or I will not lodged any case against the
first party in future."
7. On query from the Court, the opposite party No.2, who is
present in the Court submits that he is working under the petitioners
and due to misunderstanding, the incident had happened. Out of
sudden provocation, he had filed the F.I.R. However, after the
settlement, there is no grievance left against the petitioners rather he
is continuing working under the petitioners.
8. Ms. Moharana, learned Additional Standing Counsel for
the State submits that although the offence under Section 307 of
I.P.C. is involved in this case but reading of the medical report, it
reveals that the injuries are simple in nature. Since the parties have
settled their dispute and the opposite party No.2, who is the
employee of the petitioners, this Court may give indulgence to the
petitioners at this stage.
9. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have settled
their dispute and keeping in view the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and
another reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 and B.S. Joshi & others vs.
State of Haryana & another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, I am of
the considered view that subjecting the petitioners to the rigors of
the trial would be a futile exercise. Therefore, the petition deserves
merit.
10. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding in connection with
C.T. Case No.203 of 2024 arising out of Kharabelnagar P.S. Case
No.62 of 2024 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M.,
Bhubaneswar and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom
qua the petitioners are quashed, subject to the petitioners paying
cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) each to the opposite party
No.2.
11. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Location: High court of orissa
