[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Prakash Kumar vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 6 February, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.285 of 2026
Prakash Kumar .... Petitioner(s)
Mahanty @ Prakash
Kumar Mohanty
Smt. Anitarani Panda, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite Party(s)
Mr. Udit Ranjan Jena, AGA
Mr. Biswa Ranjan Dalai, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 06.02.2026
03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. In the present CRLMC, the Petitioner has prayed for
quashing of the entire criminal proceeding initiated
against him in connection with C.T. Case No.463 of 2025
arising out of Khantapada P.S. Case No.169 of 2025
pending before the Court of learned J.M.F.C (R), Balasore.
3. Heard.
4. It is well settled that although the offences under
Sections 126(2), 296, 115(2), 76, 351(3) of the Bharatiya
Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Location: High Court of Orissa
Cr.P.C., is not denuded of power to quash the criminal
Date: 06-Feb-2026 18:24:22
proceeding where the dispute is essentially private and
matrimonial in nature and the parties have voluntarily
arrived at a genuine and complete settlement. The
underlying object of such exercise is to secure the ends of
justice and to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.
Where the continuation of the criminal proceeding, despite
an amicable settlement, would serve no fruitful purpose
and would only perpetuate bitterness between the parties,
the High Court would be justified in interdicting the
prosecution, particularly when the informant herself has
unequivocally expressed her consent for such quashing.
4. Considering the contents of the joint affidavit filed by
the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2/ informant and
following the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another1, and two other
reported cases of this Court in Lokanath @ Anadi Sethi
and four others v. State of Orissa and four others2, and
Sansuri alias Khageswar Lenka and another -vrs.- State
of Orissa and Another3, wherein this Court is of the
opinion that no useful purpose will be served in allowing
such proceedings to continue the criminal proceeding in
the aforesaid case as it will only lead to abuse the process
of law.
(2012) 10 SCC 303
Reason: Authentication
Date: 06-Feb-2026 18:24:22
2014 (II) OLR 29
Location: High Court of Orissa
3 2014 (II) OLR 452
5. In view of the aforesaid discussion and considerations,
the application is allowed. Accordingly, the entire criminal
proceeding initiated against the Petitioner vide C.T. Case
No.463 of 2025 arising out of Khantapada P.S. Case No.169
of 2025 pending before the Court of learned J.M.F.C (R),
Balasore stands quashed.
6. At this juncture, considering the fact that the present
proceeding arises out of a family dispute between the
mother-Opposite Party No.2 and Son-Petitioner who is
alleged to have tortured his mother, this Court directs the
Petitioner-Son to give an undertaking before the I.I.C,
Khantapada Police Station stating that he will not threaten
or torture his parents henceforth.
7. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of.
8. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated.
9. In view of disposal of the present CRLMC, personal
appearance of the Petitioner-Son and the Opposite Party
No.2-mother who appear in Court today pursuant to the
earlier order of this Court, is dispensed with.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Ayaskanta
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 06-Feb-2026 18:24:22
