[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Himanshu Sekhar @ vs State Of Orissa & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 11 February, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.198 of 2025
Himanshu Sekhar @ .... Petitioner(s)
Himansu Sekhar Panda
& Anr.
Ms. Sujata Jena, Sr. Adv.
along with associates
-versus-
State of Orissa & Anr. .... Opposite Party(s)
Miss Gayatri Patra, ASC
Ms. Susama Rani Sahoo, Adv.
Mr. M. Mahammad, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 11.02.2026
05. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. In the present CRLMC, the Petitioners have prayed for
quashing the entire criminal proceeding initiated against
them in connection with Tangi Town P.S. Case No.172 of
2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.881 of 2024 pending
before the Court of learned J.M.F.C-II (Cog.Taking),
Cuttack.
3. Heard.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioners and
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 12-Feb-2026 16:22:32
in one tone submit that in the meantime, both the parties
are agreed to settle the dispute amicably.
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the State, on
instruction, submits that after untimely death of the
deceased-mother the one-year-old baby is being reared up
by his father and the parents of his deceased mother.
6. Looking to the joint affidavit given by the Petitioners
and the Opposite Party No.2, though this Court is of the
view that this kind of offences are not amenable for
quashing of cases of this nature, considering the peaceful
atmosphere in the house of both the parties who are
unitedly taking care of the one-year-old child after
untimely death of his mother, this Court is of the view that
continuation of the criminal proceeding, despite an
amicable settlement, would serve no fruitful purpose and
would only perpetuate bitterness between the parties.
7. It is also well settled that although the offences under
Sections 85, 103, 80, 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are
non-compoundable, the High Court, in exercise of its
inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., is
not denuded of power to quash the criminal proceeding
where the dispute is essentially private and matrimonial in
nature and the parties have voluntarily arrived at a
Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA genuine and complete settlement. The underlying object of
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 12-Feb-2026 16:22:32
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 himself has unequivocally
expressed his consent for such quashing.
8. Considering the contents of the joint affidavit filed by
the Petitioners 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.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion and considerations,
the application is allowed. Accordingly, the entire criminal
proceeding initiated against the Petitioner vide G.R. Case
(2012) 10 SCC 303
Digitally Signed
Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA 2
2014 (II) OLR 29
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication 3
Location: High Court of Orissa
2014 (II) OLR 452
Date: 12-Feb-2026 16:22:32
No.881 of 2024 arising out of Tangi Town P.S. Case No.172
of 2024 pending before the Court of the learned J.M.F.C-II
(Cog. Taking), Cuttack stands quashed.
10. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of.
11. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Ayaskanta
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 12-Feb-2026 16:22:32
