Orissa High Court
Sriraj Kumar Padhi @ Padhy vs Jitesh Kumar Mohapatra .... Opposite ... on 29 January, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4757 of 2023
Sriraj Kumar Padhi @ Padhy .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Jitesh Kumar Mohapatra .... Opposite Party(s)
Mr. S. J. Mohanty, ASC
Mr. J. N. Panda, Advocate
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 29.01.2025
03. 1. Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party, the complaint case
being I.C.C. Case No.04 of 2022 for the alleged commission of
offences under Sections 294/323/506/182/34 of I.P.C. came to be
registered against the petitioner.
3. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 17.04.2023
passed by the learned J.M.F.C., M. Rampur in I.C.C. Case No.04 of
2022, whereby the learned Court below has taken cognizance of the
offences punishable under Sections 294/506 of I.P.C. against him.
4. The petitioner, who is working as S.I. of Police M. Rampur
P.S. is present in Court through Virtual Mode. The opposite party is
also present through Virtual Mode. They are represented and being
identified by their respective counsels. They have also filed self-
attested copies of their Aadhar Cards to establish their identity,
which are taken on record.
5. The opposite party has filed a compromise affidavit dated
23.12.2024 inter alia stating as under:-
<2. That due to some misunderstanding
this deponent had lodged the complaint
case against the petitioner and now the
matter has been amicable resolved
between the parties and there are no
differences between them. The
Complainant and the petitioner is now
living peacefully in the society.
3. That this deponent herein does not
want to pursue the matter against the
petitioner in the learned Court below in
view of the amicable settlement
between them and hence this
affidavit.=
6. Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the
State submits that since the allegations are minor in nature and the
opposite party is a practicing lawyer whereas the petitioner is the
police officer and now they have settled their dispute and opposite
party has filed affidavit before this Court to that effect and does not
want to prosecute the matter, this Court may give indulgence in the
present matter as there is no legal impediment.
7. 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 petitioner to the rigors of the
trial would be a futile exercise. Therefore, the petition deserves
merit.
8. Accordingly, the order dated 17.04.2023 passed by the
learned J.M.F.C., M. Rampur in I.C.C. Case No.04 of 2022 and the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioner are
quashed.
9. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Location: High Court of Orissa
