Pramod Kumar Mohanty vs Dayanidhi Jena .... Opposite Party(S)
2026 Latest Caselaw 1076 Ori

Orissa High Court

Pramod Kumar Mohanty vs Dayanidhi Jena .... Opposite Party(S) on 6 February, 2026

Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi

Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                                 CRLMC No.5391 of 2025

                                  Pramod Kumar Mohanty ....                         Petitioner(s)
                                                                         Mr. Sk. Zafarulla, Adv.

                                                           -versus-
                                  Dayanidhi Jena             ....             Opposite Party(s)
                                                                         Miss Bini Mishra, Adv.

                                          CORAM:
                                          HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
                                                             ORDER

                          Order                             06.02.2026
                          No.           CRLMC No.5391 of 2025 with CRLMC No.4794 of 2025

                     01.          1.     These matters are taken up through hybrid

                                  arrangement.

2. Since common question of facts and laws are involved in

both the above mentioned CRLMCs, the same are heard

together and disposed of by this common order. However,

this Court feels it apposite to deal with the CRLMC

No.5391 of 2025 as the leading case for proper and

effective adjudication of both the cases.

3. Heard.

4. In filing the CRLMC No.5391 of 2025, the Petitioner

being the issuer of the dishonoured cheque in question

pertaining to which the Criminal Proceeding involved

herein has been initiated against him, has prayed for Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa quashing the order of cognizance dated 21.10.2020 vide Date: 09-Feb-2026 19:07:10

Annexure-2 so also the entire criminal proceeding initiated

against him vide 1CC Case No.42 of 2020 corresponding to

T.R. Case No.573 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned

J.M.F.C, Soro.

5. Challenging institution of the criminal proceeding

against the Petitioner, learned counsel for the Petitioner

submits that in order to purchase a piece of land, the

Petitioner had issued the dishonoured cheque in question

in favour of the Opposite Party-Complainant in good faith.

He further contends that the Petitioner had never advised

the Opposite Party-Complainant to invest the said cheque.

But, the Opposite Party-Complainant without intimating

the Petitioner had invested the said cheque when there

was no sufficient amount in the Bank account of the

Petitioner. He also relies on the decision of the Supreme

Court in the case of Shiv Kumar alias Jawahar Saraf Vrs.

Ramvtar Agarwal 1 and in the case of Sri Om Sales Vrs.

Abhay Kumar alias Abhay Patel and Anr. 2 . He,

accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this

CRLMC.

6. In her opposition, learned counsel for the Opposite

Party-Complainant, submits that upon lodging of the F.I.R

the charge-sheet has already been submitted and based on

the said charge-sheet, order of cognizance has been passed

Reason: Authentication (2020) 12 SCC 500 Location: High Court of Orissa 2 Date: 09-Feb-2026 19:07:10 2025 SCC Online SC 2897

which is impugned herein. She further contends that trial

pertaining to the above noted case has already been

started and presently, it is in the midst of trial. She further

contends that whether the Petitioner has committed any

such offences or not; can only be answered after

conclusion of the trial which is going to be concluded

soon. She also contends that there are no compelling

reasons to quash the entire proceeding at this stage. She,

accordingly, prays for dismissal of this CRLMC.

7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the

parties and since the order of cognizance has already been

passed, this Court is of the view that whether the

Petitioner has committed any such offences or not; can

only be answered after conclusion of the trial which is

going to be concluded soon. It is also well settled that the

appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court.

This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C

cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the

process of trial provided under the law. The power under

Section 482 of the Cr.P.C at the pre-trial stage should not

be used in a routine manner, but it has to be used

sparingly only in such an appropriate cases, where it

manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the

institution or continuation of the criminal proceedings.

This Court, in the present context, declines to quash the Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-Feb-2026 19:07:10

entire above noted criminal proceeding initiated against

the Petitioner.

8. The CRLMC No.5391 of 2025 is, accordingly, dismissed.

9. Consequently, the connected case vide CRLMC No.4794

of 2025 is also dismissed.

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Ayaskanta

Location: High Court of Orissa