Kalia @ Hrusikesh Raiguru vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opp. ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 2641 Ori

Orissa High Court

Kalia @ Hrusikesh Raiguru vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opp. ... on 16 January, 2025

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                          CRLMC No.108 of 2025


             Kalia @ Hrusikesh Raiguru      ....    Petitioners
             & another                           Mr.D.Mohapatra,
                                                 Advocate



                                 -versus-


             State of Odisha & others       .... Opp. Parties
                                               Mr. Udit Ranjan
                                               Jena, AGA


         CORAM:

                   JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA


Order                            ORDER
 No.                           16.01.2025
 01.
        1.

Heard.

2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. in connection with Khallikote P.S. Case No.539 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1148 of 2020 came to be registered against the petitioners for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 341/294/323/325/506/34 of the IPC, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Khallikote.

3. The allegation against the petitioners is that, the complainant lodged a written report at the Khallikote P.S. alleging that, on 25.12.2020, when his uncle Ulash Mahapatra (the opposite party No.2) was cooking at Narayani temple, at that time, the accused petitioner No.2-Bibhuti Bhusan Debata abused him in filthy language. Then the nephew and his son came and assaulted his uncle by a stone, as a result of which he sustained injury on his head and on the other portions of his body and threatened till him. Hence, the F.I.R.

4. After the investigation, the charge sheet has been filed in the present case on 20.02.2021 for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 341/294/323/506/34/307 of the IPC.

5. In so far as the petitioner No.2-Bibhuti Bhusan Debata is concerned, the charge sheet has been filed against him for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 294/506 of the IPC only whereas the other accused persons, the petitioner No.1 and another juvenile Nandu @ Subhransu Debata are e charge sheeted for the alleged commission of all the offences as mentioned above.

6. Before commencement of the trial, the parties have settled their dispute and the petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing the criminal prosecution.

7. The petitioners and the opposite party No.1, the informant and the opposite party No.2, the victim/

injured are present in the Court today. They are being represented by their respective counsel 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.

8. The parties have filed a joint affidavit before this Court stating as under:

"2. That, the Opp. Party No.2 in the aforesaid Criminal Misc. Case, being the informant lodged a written complaint before the I.I.C., Khallikote Police Station against the present petitioners, which was registered as Khallikote P.S. Case No.539 of 2020 dtd. 26.12.2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No.1148/2020 under Sections 341, 294, 323, 506, 34, 307 of IPC, which is pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C., Khallikote.

3. That, during the pendency of the above noted G.R. Case, the dispute between the Opp. Party No.2 (Informant) & Opp. Party No.3 (Injured) and the Petitioners/Accused persons have been amicably settled out of Court, with the intervention of local gentries and well-wishers. Due to such settlement and in order to maintain the future peace among the parties, the Opp. Party No.2 (Informant) & Opp. Party No.3 (Injured) expresses their unwillingness to proceed further in the case.

4. That, in view of such amicable settlement, the Opp. Party No.2/Informant does not want to proceed the aforesaid criminal case further as against the present petitioner. It is relevant to submit herewith that the present case has been foisted by the Opp. Party No.2 due to political misunderstanding and village rivalry.

5. That, the Opp. Party No.2 (Informant) & Opp. Party No.3 (Injured) have no objection, if the criminal proceeding/F.I.R. made against the present petitioners may be quashed by this Hon'ble Court in the above Criminal Miscellaneous Application.

6. That it is also submitted here that, in event of continuance of the present proceeding there is every chance/possibility of ill-feeling among the parties to which neither the Opp. Party No.2 (Informant) &

Opp. Party No.3 (Injured) nor the petitioners intending for.

7. That, the petitioner and the Opp. Party No.2 (Informant) & Opp. Party No.3 (Injured) jointly swears this Affidavit before this Hon'ble Court without any threat and coercion from any corner."

9. The injured is present in the Court today. On query from the Court, he stated that, although he was severely injured by the petitioners, but he has already entered into a settlement with the petitioners to maintain the peace and tranquility in the area. The settlement has been arrived at the intervention of the local gentries and the well-wishers. He does not want to prosecute the petitioners any more. He became the friends with the petitioners.

10. Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite party No.1-State submits that, although the injuries sustained by the victim is grievous in nature and the charge sheet under Section 307 of the IPC has been filed against the petitioner No.1 and the co-accused, who is a juvenile, however, the victim as well as the informant have filed a joint affidavit before this Court joining with the petitioners praying for quashing of the F.I.R. No fruitful purpose would be served, if the petitioners would be subjected to the rigors of the trial. Therefore, this Court may give indulgence in the present matter.

11. I have perused the charge sheet and the related documents placed along with the charge sheet. The

parties belong to the same locality and they have entered into a settlement. The parties are present in the Court today and conjointly pray for quashment of the criminal prosecution against the petitioners.

12. Regard being had to the terms of the settlement and the fact that the injured has not only filed the affidavit but also stated before this Court on the query of the Court that, he does not intend to prosecute the petitioners any more. Hence, I am inclined to allow the present petition.

13. In the fact scenario of the present case, subjecting the petitioners to the rigors of trial destined to 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 MadhavraoJi Wajirao Scindia & another v. Sambhajirao ChandrojiraoAngre and others, reported in AIR 1988 SC 709, therefore, the petition deserves merit.

14. Taking into consideration the aforementioned judgments, the facts of the case and submissions made at the Bar, the F.I.R. in connection with Khallikote P.S. Case No.539 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1148 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Khallikote and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners are

quashed, subject to the each of the petitioners paying Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred) to the victim-opposite party No.2 during the course of the day.

15. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra) Judge Subhasis

Designation: Personal Assistant

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 17-Jan-2025 14:45:59