Allowed

Rabindranath Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC26 Feb 2024CRLMC/617/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa quashed the F.I.R. and consequential proceedings against the petitioner under the SC/ST (POA) Act and IPC following an investigation failing to direct murder and a discharged dispute settled by parties via a joint affidavit, with the Additional Government Advocate condoning quashing.

What did the court decide?

The F.I.R. dated 15.08.2019 and consequential proceedings qua the Petitioners were quashed.

Rabindranath Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Caste Atrocities | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No. 617 OF 2023

¶3

Rabindra Pradhan and others …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. R. K. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
….
State of Odisha and another Opposite Party
Mr. B. K. Ragada, AGA
Mr. S. K. Dash, Advocate
(for O.P.2)
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
26.02.2024
Order No.
03. 1. Heard.

¶5

At the instance of Opposite Party No.2, the F.I.R. dated 15.08.2019 in Purighat P.S. Case No.164 of 2019 under Sections 341, 323, 294 and 34 of I.P.C. read with Sections 3(1)(r)(s) & 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST (POA) Act came to be registered against all the three accused persons. However, after investigation, the charge-sheet is filed against the Petitioner No.2 only.

¶6

Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the present

¶7

petition was filed prior to the charge-sheet was laid down by the

¶8

Page 1 of 3

¶9

police. Therefore, all the accused persons in the F.I.R. have been made parties.

¶10

All the Petitioners and Opposite Party No.2 are present in

¶11

the Court and being identified by their respective counsels. They

¶12

have also filed the self-attested copies of their Aadhaar Cards before this Court to establish their identity, which are taken on record. They are conjointly stating that they have settled the

¶13

dispute on the intervention of the well-wishers and the village gentries.

¶14

The Petitioner No.2 and the Opposite Party No.2 have filed a joint affidavit dated 05.05.2023 inter alia stating that they have settled their dispute and the Opposite Party No.2 is not inclined to proceed with the prosecution against the Petitioner No.2.

¶15

Mr. Ragada, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State submits that the charge-sheet has been filed against the

¶16

Petitioner No.2 only and since the parties have settled their dispute and filed a joint affidavit, there is no legal impediment in quashing the F.I.R.

¶17

Taking into consideration the aforementioned facts and submission at the Bar, the F.I.R. dated 15.08.2019 in Purighat P.S. Case No.164 of 2019 corresponding to C.T. Case No.92 of 2019

¶18

pending in the Court of the learned Special Court under the SC &

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

ST (POA) Act, Cuttack and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the Petitioners are quashed.

¶21

The CRLMC is disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra)

Judge

Swarna

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 27-Feb-2024 11:12:59

¶27

Page 3 of 3

Rabindranath Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabindranath Pradhan 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

Satya Narayan Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Mitu@Pradeep Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Shankar Kumar Kandi Vs State of Odisha

Madan Harijan Vs State of Odisha

Govinda @ Gobinda Sagar @ Danial Vs State of Odisha

Makar Mallick Vs State of Odisha