[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Anupam Chakra vs Nilamadhab Praharaj .... Opposite ... on 20 March, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4524 of 2025
Anupam Chakra .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Shyam Sundar Chhualsingh, Adv.
-versus-
Nilamadhab Praharaj .... Opposite Party(s)
Dr. Sujata Dash, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 20.03.2026
03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. In the present CRLMC, the Petitioner being the issuer of
the dishonored cheque in question in favour of the sole
Opposite Party, has prayed for quashing the impugned
order dated 04.07.2025 passed by the learned
S.D.J.M(Sadar), Cuttack in 1CC Case No.333 of 2025.
3. Heard the parties and perused the records.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
complaint case in question instituted against the Petitioner
was filed with a delay of 21 (twenty-one) days. It is
contended that despite best efforts of the Petitioner, the
learned Court in seisin over the matter did not pay any
attention to the same and condoned the delay vide
impugned order dated 04.07.2025. He also submits that the
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49 complaint case was filed without any application for
condonation of delay. The application for condonation of
delay was filed separately. The Petitioner had given the
dishonored cheque in question to the Opposite Party on
some good faith. But, the Opposite Party used the said
cheque only to harass the Petitioner. According to him,
continuation of the proceeding would amount to an abuse
of the process of Court and result in undue harassment to
the Petitioner. On these premises, he prays that this Court
may be pleased to allow the relief sought in the present
CRLMC and quash the impugned proceeding in the
interest of justice.
5. In opposition, learned counsel for the Opposite Party-
complainant submits that since the complainant was
suffering from HTN with reeling of head, he could not file
the above noted complaint case in time. In order to
support his above claim, the Opposite Party-complainant
had also submitted necessary medical documents before
the learned Court in seisin over the matter. It is contended
that at this stage, when the said Court has found a prima
facie case against the Petitioner after condonation of delay,
there exists no compelling or exceptional circumstance
warranting exercise of inherent jurisdiction to quash the
impugned order dated 04.07.2025. He, accordingly, prays
Designation: Personal Assistant
for dismissal of this CRLMC.
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49
6. Having considered the rival submissions advanced on
behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the materials
available on record, this Court finds that the above noted
complaint case was filed belatedly due to the Opposite
Party-complainant suffering from HTN with reeling of
head. He had also filed necessary medical documents to
that effect which has been taken into consideration by the
learned Court in seisin over the matter while condoning
the delay in filing the said complaint. This Court,
therefore, does not find any flaw in the impugned order
dated 04.07.2025.
8. Accordingly, this Court declines to exercise its inherent
jurisdiction to quash the impugned order dated 04.07.2025.
9. This CRLMC is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Ayaskanta
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49
