Orissa High Court
Simanchala Mishra vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opp. Parties on 10 September, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.3118 of 2025
Simanchala Mishra ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Biswajit Mohanty
-versus-
1) State Of Odisha ..... Opp. Parties
2) Victim Represented By Adv. -
informant S.K. Parhi, A.S.C.
Mahimananda Swain,
Adv. for O.P. No.2
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
10.09.2025
Order No.
03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party
No.2. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.
3. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of
the Cr.P.C. thereby invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court
to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Gangapur
P.S. Case No.416 of 2023 which corresponds to G.R. Case
No.1063 of 2023, further corresponds to S.T. Case No.79 of 2023
is now pending before the court of the learned Addl. Sessions
Judge, Aska. The aforesaid Gangapur P.S. Case was registered for
alleged commission of a crime punishable under Section 452, 323,
354-D, 354-A, 368, 376(1), 392, 506 of the IPC.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended
that due to a misunderstanding between the Petitioner and the
Informant-Opposite Party No.2, the present F.I.R. has been lodged
at the instance of the Opposite Party No.2 making allegation
against the Petitioner. He further submitted that the Petitioner and
the informant-opposite party No.2 in the meantime have resolved
their dispute amicably. He further submitted that the Opposite
Party No.2 does not want to proceed further in the present
criminal case. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also referred to
the affidavit filed by the informant before this Court which was
sworn before the Oath Commissioner of this Court on 11.08.2025.
On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner that the entire
criminal proceeding be quashed as the continuance of such
proceeding could not serve the interest of justice.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant on the other hand
supported the contentions of learned counsel for the Petitioner. He
further submitted that an affidavit has been filed by the informant
stating therein that she does not want to proceed further in the
present case as the matter has been amicably resolved on
compromise and that there exists a good relationship between both
the families. Further, it has been specifically mentioned that the
informant will have no objection in the event the entire criminal
proceeding is quashed.
6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected the
present application filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for
quashing of the entire criminal proceeding. He further submitted
that taking into consideration the nature of the allegation which is
a basically a crime of the society, this Court should not exercise
its inherent power said to under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to
quash the criminal proceeding. On such ground, learned counsel
for the State contended that the application is devoid of merit and,
accordingly, the same should be dismissed.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties, on a careful consideration of their submissions,
further taking note of the background fact as well as the
subsequent development and further taking note of the affidavit by
the informant, this Court is of the considered view that the
offences which have been alleged in the F.I.R. are mostly non-
compoundable in nature. This Court further found that there is an
allegation under Section 376 which has been construed to be a
crime against society by the Hon'ble Apex Court in its judgment
Gian Singh v. State of Punjba & Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC
303 & B.S. Joshi & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr. reported in
(2003) 4 SCC 675, therefore, this Court cannot lawfully entertain
the present application. Accordingly, the present application is
being disposed of with a direction to the learned trial court to
expedite the trial and make every endeavour to conclude the same
as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 6
months from the date of communication of a copy of today's
order. The parties are directed to cooperate with the learned trial
court for an early conclusion of the trial.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the CRLMC
stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 11-Sep-2025 12:06:04
