[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Sohel Alli @ Sohail Ali vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 20 March, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4616 of 2025
Sohel Alli @ Sohail Ali .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Suryakanta Dwibedi, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite Party(s)
Miss Gayatri Patra, ASC
Mr. Nirmaya Swain, 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 against whom the
allegation of keeping physical relationship with the
informant giving her false promise of marriage is made,
has prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding
initiated against him vide G.R. Case No.1010 of 2025
arising out of Bolangir Town P.S. Case No.409 of 2025
pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M, Bolangir.
3. Heard.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner and
learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2/informant in
one tone submit that both the parties are ready for
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
also submit that the Petitioner and the Opposite Party
Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49
No.2 were in love relationship and due to some
misunderstanding the F.I.R in question was lodged against
the Petitioner. A joint affidavit has been filed to that effect.
They, accordingly, pray for allowing the prayer made in
this CRLMC.
5. It is well settled that although the offences under
Sections 318(2), 81, 296, 115(2), 351(3) & 3 (5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 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.
6. Considering the contents of the joint affidavit filed by
the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 / informant and
since the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 were in
love relationship and the dispute arose due to some
Designation: Personal Assistant
misunderstanding between them which is resolved
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49
presently, 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. The joint
affidavit filed by the parties be kept on record.
7. 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
No.1010 of 2025 arising out of Bolangir Town P.S. Case
No.409 of 2025 pending before the Court of learned
S.D.J.M, Bolangir stands quashed.
8. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of.
9. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Ayaskanta
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 20-Mar-2026 18:18:49
