Disposed

Felu@Ajaya Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC19 Feb 2024CRLMC/97/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings after the informant and two injured persons filed affidavits stating they had settled the dispute out of court. The State raised no objection since injuries were simple despite a charge sheet including Section 307 IPC. The High Court quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings, subject to costs.

What did the court decide?

FIR in Khurda Nirakarpur P.S. Case No.284/2022 and consequential proceedings quashed, subject to Rs.1,000 cost per petitioner deposited in the Advocates' Welfare Fund.

Felu@Ajaya Behera Vs State of Odisha — Quashing and FIR | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.97 of 2023

¶3

Felu @ Ajaya Behera & others ..……. Petitioners
Mr. Manas Chand, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Orissa & others ..……. Opposite Parties
Mr. P.K. Maharaj,
Additional Standing Counsel
(For O.P. No.1)
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
19.02.2024
Order No.
05. 1. This matter was listed on 16.02.2024 and the following order was
passed:

¶4

“1. Heard.

¶5

2. Mr. Chand, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the present case there are two injured persons. The opposite party no.3 is one of the injured person apart from one Sourabha Baliarsingh. Sourabha Baliarsingh has not been impleaded. He seeks leave of this Court to implead Sourabha Baliarsingh as opposite party no.4. He may do so in course of the day and counter signing the same.

¶6

3. The injured persons namely Sourabha Baliarsingh and Siba Prasad Samantaray and the informant have filed separate affidavits inter alia stating that they have settled their dispute with the petitioners on the intervention of local gentleman and wellwishers. In order to maintain good relationship and to maintain peace in the locality, they don’t want to proceed with the matter. Therefore, they conjointly pray before this Court to quash the FIR against the petitioners.

¶7

4. The injured persons namely Sourabha Baliarsingh and Siba Prasad Samantaray and informant-Jayant Kumar Pahadasing are

¶8

¶9

present in the Court and being identified by their respective counsels. They have also filed the self-attested copies of their Aadhaar Cards before this Court to establish their identity, which are taken on record.

¶10

5. Since the petitioners are not present in the Court, list this matter on 19.02.2024.”

¶11

2. On 16.02.2024, both the injured person and the informant were

¶12

present in the Court and their presence have been dispensed with. The matter was adjourned for appearance of the petitioners/accused persons in the Court for today. In pursuance of the aforementioned order, baring the petitioner no.6, all other eight petitioners are present in the Court today. They have also filed their respective self-attested Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record.

¶13

3. The informant and the injured persons have filed their respective affidavit dated 16.02.2024, inter alia , stating that they have settled their dispute out of the Court on the intervention of the well-wishers and village gentries. They do not want to proceed with the matter further. Hence, conjointly they have prayed for dropping of the criminal prosecution against the petitioners.

¶14

4. Mr. Maharaj, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that though the charge sheet has been filed for allegedly having committed many offences including the offence under Section 307 IPC, however, the injury report indicates that the injuries are simple in nature. Therefore,

¶15

¶16

there is no legal impediment in quashing of the F.I.R. on the ground that the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court. Otherwise also the survival of the prosecution against the petitioner is a futile exercise.

¶17

5. Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned counsels at the Bar, the F.I.R. in Khurda Nirakarpur P.S. Case No.284 of 2022 pending in the Court of the learned NGN-cum-J.M.F.C., Tangi and

¶18

the consequential proceeding arising therefrom are quashed.

¶19

This order is subject to the petitioners depositing the cost of
Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) each before the Orissa High Court
Advocates’ Welfare Fund.
7. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge

¶20

Subhasis/PA.

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 20-Feb-2024 09:30:30

Felu@Ajaya Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Felu@Ajaya Behera 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

Subash Chandra Parida Vs State of Odisha

Akshya Bhoi Vs State of Odisha

Ramakanta Digal Vs State of Odisha

Shiba@Shiba Prasad Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Prafulla Kumar Barik Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

Akula Jata Vs State of Odisha