Chakradhar Moharana Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Chakradhar Moharana Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the F.I.R. in Satyabadi P.S. Case No.86 of 2018, corresponding to T.R. Case No.27 of 2020, and the consequential proceeding arising therefrom, qua the petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether the F.I.R. in Satyabadi P.S. Case No.86 of 2018 and the consequential proceeding arising therefrom should be quashed qua the petitioner in view of the parties' out-of-court settlement recorded in the joint affidavit dated 02.04.2024.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned counsels at the Bar, the F.I.R. in Satyabadi P.S. Case No.86 of 2018, corresponding to T.R. Case No.27 of 2020 pending in the Court of the learned District & Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Puri, and the consequential proceeding arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRLMC No.359 of 2023 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Sibo Sankar Mishra, J.; order dated 02.04.2024): An F.I.R. in Satyabadi P.S. Case No.86 of 2018 under Sections- 341/323/294/506/379 IPC stood registered against the petitioner, Chakradhar Moharana, at the instance of opposite party no.2, Ajaya Bhoi, following a village misunderstanding. The parties settled their dispute out of Court and filed a joint affidavit dated 02.04.2024, in which opposite party no.2 stated that the F.I.R. had been lodged without understanding the consequence and on ill advice, and that he did not wish to proceed. Their identities were verified in Court through self-attested Aadhaar Cards taken on record. Mr. Ragada, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State, submitted that the dispute was inter se the parties, that the Court may indulge, and that there was no legal impediment in quashing the F.I.R. The Court quashed the F.I.R., the corresponding T.R. Case No.27 of 2020 pending before the learned District & Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Puri, and the consequential proceeding arising therefrom, qua the petitioner, and disposed of the CRLMC.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CRLMC No.359 of 2023

Chakradhar Moharana

…. Petitioner

Mr. R.N. Mohanty, Advocate

-versus-

(1) State of Odisha …. Opp. Parties (2) Ajaya Bhoi

Mr. B.K. Ragada, AGA (For O.P. No.1) Mr. S.R. Mohapatra, Advocate (For O.P. No.2)

CORAM:

JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order No.

ORDER

02.04.2024

1 . At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the

F.I.R. in Satyabadi P.S. Case No.86 of 2018 for the

offences under Sections- 341/323/294/506/379 IPC came to be registered against the petitioner.

2. The petitioner and the opposite party no.2 belong to the same village. Due to the misunderstanding, the F.I.R. was stated to be registered against the petitioner.

Page 1 of 3

3. The parties have now settled their dispute out of the Court.

4. The petitioner and the opposite party no.2 are present in the Court today. They are being identified by their respective counsels. They have also filed photocopies of their respective self-attested Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record.

5. The petitioner and the opposite party no.2 have filed joint affidavit dated 02.04.2024, inter alia, stating that they have settled their dispute on the intervention of the village gentries and well-wishers.

The opposite party no.2 has also stated in the affidavit that he is an uneducated rustic villager and without understanding the consequence and on ill advice, he has filed the F.I.R. against the petitioner. Now, since they have settled their dispute out of the Court, he does not want to proceed with the case anymore.

6. Mr. Ragada, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that the

Page 2 of 3

dispute is arising between the parties inter se and in view of the averments made in the joint affidavit, this Court may give indulgence in this matter. There is no legal impediment in quashing the F.I.R.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned counsels at the Bar, the F.I.R. in Satyabadi P.S. Case No.86 of 2018 corresponding to T.R. Case No.27 of 2020 pending in the Court of the learned District & Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Puri and the consequential proceeding arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner.

8. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra)

Judge

Subhasis

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 03-Apr-2024 19:40:51

Page 3 of 3