Quashed

Santosh Kumar Biswal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC23 Dec 2021CRLMC/2115/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the petitioners' application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings initiated via an FIR alleging political violence. The informant confirmed the settlement of the dispute and lack of grievance, leading the Court to find no useful purpose in continuing the case.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in G.R. Case No.57 of 2017 arising out of Buguda P.S. Case No.56 of 2017 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C., Buguda is hereby quashed.

Santosh Kumar Biswal Vs State of Odisha — Quashing and FIR | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No. 2115 of 2021

¶3

Santosh Kumar Biswal & Others

¶4

…. Petitioners Mr. J. Sahoo, Adv.

¶5

-Versus -

¶6

State of Odisha and Another …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Maharaj, Addl. Standing Counsel Mr. J.K. Khandayatray, Adv. (for informant)

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

¶9

ORDER_ 23.12.2021

¶10

Order No. 03.

¶11

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶12

Mr. J.K. Khandayatray, learned counsel by filing vakalatnama has entered appearance for opposite party no.2informant. Vakalatnama be kept on record. An affidavit has also been filed by the opposite party no.2-informant sating that the matter has been settled/compromised between them.

¶13

Heard Mr. J. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. P. K. Maharaj, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. J.K. Khandayatray, learned counsel for the informant. Also heard the petitioners and informant-opposite party no.2, who have appeared in person.

¶14

The present application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the order of cognizance dated 06.11.2017 passed in

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

G.R. Case No. 57 of 2017 pending in the file of learned J.M.F.C., Buguda for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 147/148/323/506/149 of IPC.

¶17

The facts of the case are that the informant- opposite party no.2 lodged an F.I.R. before the Buguda P.S. alleging that on 16.02.2017 at 08.30 p.m. under the leadership of Local MLA Srikanta Sahu, Santosh Kumar Biswal along with other 100 persons came to his village being armed with deadly weapons and terrorized the villagers and threatened and forced them to cast their vote for BJD Party. When the villagers protested, they abused them in obscene language and threw three bombs and fired openly for three times and assaulted the villagers causing bleeding injury.

¶18

It is submitted that subsequently, the dispute between the parties has been settled amicably. An affidavit has been filed being sworn by the informant stating that the matter has been amicably settled/compromised between them and he does not want to proceed any further in the case.

¶19

On the above basis, it is submitted that as the proceeding had been initiated due to political rivalry, but has since been resolved amicably as also the fact that the concerned parties do not wish to continue with the proceeding, the same may be quashed.

¶20

A perusal of the affidavit filed by the informant reveal

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

that he does not want to proceed in the case further. The informant has also no grievance against the petitioners in this case. The matter has been amicably settled and compromised. The informant being present in Court on being asked fully supported the contents of the affidavit.

¶23

Considering the submissions made as noted above and the affidavit filed by the informant, it is evident that the dispute has been amicably settled. Under such circumstances, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing continuance of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners, especially when the chance of conviction in the said case is bleak.

¶24

This Court is therefore, inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioners. The proceedings in G.R. Case No.57 of 2017 arising out of Buguda P.S. Case No.56 of 2017 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C., Buguda is hereby quashed

¶25

Accordingly, the CRLMC is disposed of.

¶26

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶27

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶28

A.K. Rana

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Santosh Kumar Biswal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Biswal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surjit@Sujit Karmakar Vs State of Odisha

Harihar Panda Vs State of Odisha

Bharat@Chagala Moharana Vs State of Odisha

Ganesh Selma Vs State of Orissa

Tapas Ranjan Panda Vs State of Odisha

Santa@Santosh Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha