Wednesday, 06, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sridhar Kumar Mishra vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2332 Ori

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2332 Ori
Judgement Date : 13 March, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Sridhar Kumar Mishra vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 13 March, 2026

Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                     CRLMC No.767 of 2026
             Sridhar Kumar Mishra          ....                          Petitioner(s)
                                                      Mr. Sahasransu Sourav, Advocate
                                                -Versus-
              State of Odisha & Anr.       ....                    Opposite Party (s)
                                                                Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC
                                                             Mr. Suryakant Dwibedi,
                                                                Advocate for O.P No.2
                                        CORAM:
                       THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
                                        ORDER

13.03.2026 Order No.

01.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

2. The Petitioner has filed this CRLMC with a prayer to quash the

FIR in connection with Manamunda P.S Case No.331 of 2024

corresponding to S.T. Case No.39 of 2025 pending in the Court of the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantamal.

3. The brief fact of the case, as alleged in the FIR, is that on

06.11.2024 at 7.00 P.M., the complainant, named, Smt. Bharati Dash,

W/o Sridhara Mishra of village Similipadar PS-Manamunda, Dist-

Boudh appeared at PS and presented a written report that she had been

married to Sridhara Mishra, S/o-Suresh Chandra Mishra nine years ago

in vedic rituals. Her father had passed away before her marriage. At

the time of marriage, her mother had given dowry as per her capacity.

She blessed with two daughters one is 7 years and another is 3 years

old. She alleged that her husband was not doing any work. He always

demanded for money from her mother and tortured her. She being

compromised many times with her husband in presence of gentlemen

of her village came to her husband's house. On 04.11.2024 at about

10.00 AM her husband demanded for Rs.2,00,000/- to her mother. When

she refused to bring money from her mother, her husband squeezed

her younger daughter's neck. She rescued her daughter from the clutch

of her husband. Thereafter, her husband abused her in obscence

language and threatened to kill her life. He also beaten her by means of

stick (medha), as a result of which, she sustained severe injuries on her

head. Her father-in-law shifted her to CHC, Manamunda by an

Ambulance wherefrom she was referred to DHH, Sonepur. Hence this

case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency

of the criminal proceeding, the matter has been amicably settled

between the parties in the meantime. The Opposite Party No.2 has filed

an affidavit to that effect.

5. Perused the affidavit filed by the Opposite Party No.2. The

relevant contents thereof are extracted hereunder: --

"I, Bharati Dash, aged about 31 years, Wife of Sridhar Kumar Mishra, At-31, Similipadar, Village -Similipadar(Part), G.P./Town - Similipadar,

P.S. Manamunda, Dist - Boudh, Pin-762030, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:

1. That I am the informant in Manamunda P.S. Case No.331 corresponding to S.T Case No.39 of 2025 pending in the Court of the learned Additional and District Judge, Kantamal, Boudh.

2. That, in the meantime upon efforts and attempts being made by the friends and elders as well as the respectable people of the society, thereby clarifying all the bonafide mistakes, misunderstandings between me and my husband Sridhar Kumar Mishra, Son of Sureswara Mishra, At/Via/P.O| Similipadar, P.S. Manamunda, Dist -

Boudh, Pin-762030. Moreover, due to intervention of well-wishers, friends and family members, all the disputes between me and my husband stands finally resolved amicably and there is no ill will or complaint against each other in any manner. Furthermore, I am staying happily with my husband and two minor children at our matrimonial house. Thus, I have agreed to withdraw the complaint made against my husband and I undertake to make such statements before the court in this respect as and when required and this affidavit may be utilised for quashing of criminal proceedings arising from Manamunda P.S. Case No.331 corresponding to S.T. Case No.39 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Additional and District Judge, Kantamal, Boudh.

3. That, I am executing this affidavit with my consent and free will without any pressure, force, coercion or undue influence from any side.

4. That the facts stated above are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief."

6. Having perused the joint affidavits filed by the parties, this Court

is of the view that the scope and ambit of the inherent powers of this

Court under Section 482 CrPC is well settled. Such power is to be

exercised sparingly, with circumspection, and only to secure the ends

of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of Court. At the same time,

it is equally settled that the High Court, in appropriate cases, is not

powerless to quash criminal proceedings even in respect of non-

compoundable offences, if the facts and circumstances so warrant and

if continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the

process of law.

7. This Court is conscious of the fact that quashing of criminal

proceedings should not be permitted to defeat the object of special

statutes. However, the peculiar facts of the present case, coupled with

the unequivocal stand of the informant and the subsequent

developments, persuade this Court to hold that the ends of justice

would be better served by putting an end to the criminal proceeding

rather than allowing it to continue mechanically.

8. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the

petitioner and upon careful perusal of the joint affidavit filed by the

parties, this Court is of the considered view that the dispute between

the parties has been amicably resolved. In the circumstances,

continuation of the criminal proceeding at this stage would serve no

useful or meaningful purpose and would only result in unnecessary

prolongation of the proceedings and avoidable burden on the docket of

the Court.

9. In view of the foregoing discussion, the CRLMC stands allowed.

Consequently, the FIR in connection with Manamunda P.S Case No.331

of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No.39 of 2025 pending in the Court

of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantamal, is hereby quashed.

10. The CRLMC is disposed of, accordingly.

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge

Gitanjali

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter