Suresh Kumar Sharma v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Nov 2025CRLMC/3812/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing on mediated settlement; Orissa High Court Mediation Centre; Rs.1,25,00,000 (One Crore Twenty-Five Lakhs) full and final settlement by cheque dated 22.10.2025; joint affidavit; G.R. Case No.101 of 2016, J.M.F.C. Banarpal; Angul Industrial P.S. (NISA) Case No.13 of 2016; Criminal Revision No.04 of 2024, District and Sessions Judge Angul; Section 216 CrPC petition rejected 13.08.2024; Complainant/Informant does not support prosecution, no chance of conviction; no objection by Informant and State; CRLMC No.3812 of 2024, decided 12.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 arising out of Angul Industrial P.S. (NISA) Case No.13 of 2016 pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal. ¶¶23

Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 arising out of Angul Industrial P.S. (NISA) Case No.13 of 2016 pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal.

¶¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the inherent power of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised to quash the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 (arising out of Angul Industrial P.S. (NISA) Case No.13 of 2016) in view of the amicable settlement between the parties arrived at in mediation. +1 more

¶¶15

Court's answer

On examination of the mediator's report dated 24.10.2025 and the joint affidavit filed before the learned Mediator, the Court is of the view that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

Allowing the proceeding to continue further is bound to cause prejudice to both sides and would not be in the larger interest of justice.

¶¶21

Key takeaways

Since the Informant-Opposite Party No.2 does not support the case of the prosecution, there is no chance of conviction.ratio¶¶21
The present case is a fit case for exercise of the Court's inherent power to quash the criminal proceeding; accordingly the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal is quashed and the CRLMC application is allowed.ratio¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal quashing — inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. — parties to G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 (arising out of Angul Industrial P.S. (NISA) Case No.13 of 2016), pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal, settled their dispute before the Orissa High Court Mediation Centre pursuant to reference by order dated 13.02.2025; towards full and final settlement the Petitioner handed over a cheque of Rs.1,25,00,000/- (One Crore Twenty-Five Lakhs) dated 22.10.2025 to the Complainant-Opposite Party No.2, and a joint affidavit recording the settlement and the parties' agreement to withdraw criminal complaints against each other was filed before the Mediator (report dated 24.10.2025). Before the Court, counsel for the Informant admitted receipt of the settlement amount, stated the Complainant does not want to proceed further, and raised no objection to quashing; the State also raised no objection. Holding that continuance would cause prejudice to both sides and would not be in the larger interest of justice, and that since the Informant does not support the prosecution there is no chance of conviction, the Court found the case fit for exercise of inherent power, quashed the criminal proceeding and allowed the CRLMC application. (Background: J.M.F.C., Banarpal order dated 13.08.2024 rejecting the Petitioner's Section 216 Cr.P.C. petition was confirmed by the District and Sessions Judge, Angul in Criminal Revision No.04 of 2024 by order dated 12.09.2024.)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3812 of 2024

¶2

Suresh Kumar Sharma and ..... Petitioners

¶3

others

¶4

Represented By Adv. - Satya Smruti Mohanty

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State Of Odisha and another ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. - Prasant Kishore Ray ,krushna Chandra Dash ,ananta Prasad Thanapati ,manoj Kumar Sahoo Mr. S.S. Das Mr. S.K. Parhi, ASC

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

12.11.2025

Order No.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶13

Heard Mr. S.S. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as Mr. S.S. Das, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party-Informant and learned counsel for the State.

¶14

Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.

¶15

By filing the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the Petitioners seek to invoke the inherent power of this Court to quash order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the learned District and Sessions Jude, Angul in Criminal Revision No.04 of 2024, whereby

¶16

Page 1 of 4.

¶17

the revision petition filed by the Petitioner was dismissed and the order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 was confirmed by rejecting petition filed by the Petitioner under Section 216 of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

On perusal of the record it appears that with the consent of the learned counsels appearing for both sides and further taking into consideration the nature of the dispute involved, the matter was sent to the Orissa High Court Mediation Centre for an amicable resolution of the dispute between the Parties vide order dated 13.02.2025 of the Coordinate Bench. In the meantime, a report of the mediator dated 24.10.2025 has been received by this Court. On perusal of the report of the learned Mediator it appears that the mediation proceeding has been successful. It further reveals that both parties have settled their dispute and the Petitioner, towards full and final settlement of the claim, has handed over a cheque amount of Rs.1,25,00,000/- (One Crore Twenty-Five Lakhs) dated 22.10.2025 to the Claimant-Opposite Party No.2, who received the same in the presence of his father before the mediator. Further, a joint affidavit has been filed by the Parties before the learned Mediator is also evident from his report. A copy of the joint affidavit is also on record. On perusal of the said affidavit it appears that both parties have admitted the fact that the dispute has been settled and that the Opposite Party No.2 has received a sum of Rs.1,25,00,000/- (One Crore Twenty-Five Lakhs). It further reveals that the parties have agreed that the settlement before the mediator shall bring an end to all disputes pending between the parties and, further in para-5, it has been indicated that the parties shall take steps for withdrawal of the criminal complaints against each other.

¶19

Page 2 of 4.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Informant is present in Court, while supporting the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner he has admitted the fact that the Opposite Party No.2-Complainant has received a sum of Rs.1,25,00,000/- (One Crore Twenty-Five Lakhs) towards full and final settlement of her claim. He further submitted that the complainant-Opp. Party No.2 does not want to proceed further in the G.R. Case No.13 of 2016. On such ground, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 submitted that he will have no objection in the event this Court quashing the entire criminal proceeding against the present Petitioner. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted that since the matter has been amicably resolved in a mediation proceeding they have no objection in the event this Court passes a reasoned order securing the ends of justice.

¶21

Having heard learned counsels appearing for both sides, on careful examination of the materials on record and further taking note of the report of the mediator dated 24.10.2025 communicated to this Court as well as the joint affidavit filed before the learned Mediator, this Court is of the view that the Parties have amicably resolved the dispute. This Court is of the view that allowing the proceeding to continue further is bound to cause prejudice to both sides and that the same would not be in the larger interest of justice. Moreover, since the Informant-Opposite Party No.2 does not support the case of the prosecution, there is no chance of conviction. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is also of the view that the present case is a fit case where this Court can exercise its inherent power for quashing the present criminal proceeding. Accordingly, Criminal Proceeding in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 arising out of Angul Industrial P.S. (NISA) Case No.13 of 2016

¶22

Page 3 of 4.

¶23

pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal is hereby quashed and the CRLMC application is allowed.

¶24

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶25

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge

¶26

Sisir

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 14-Nov-2025 10:21:37

¶29

Page 4 of 4.

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 12.09.2024 of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Angul in Criminal Revision No.04 of 2024 dismissing the Petitioner's revision petition and confirming the order dated 13.08.2024 of the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 rejecting the Petitioner's petition under Section 216 Cr.P.C.¶¶15
District and Sessions Judge, Angul · 12.09.2024
Prior proceeding
Criminal proceeding instituted as G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 before the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal, arising out of Angul Industrial P.S. (NISA) Case No.13 of 2016.¶¶21
Prior proceeding
Petition filed by the Petitioner under Section 216 Cr.P.C. in G.R. Case No.101 of 2016 rejected by the learned J.M.F.C., Banarpal by order dated 13.08.2024.¶¶17
Prior proceeding
Revision petition (Criminal Revision No.04 of 2024) filed by the Petitioner before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Angul dismissed by order dated 12.09.2024.¶¶17
Prior proceeding
With consent of counsel and considering the nature of the dispute, the matter was sent to the Orissa High Court Mediation Centre for amicable resolution vide order dated 13.02.2025 of the Coordinate Bench.¶¶18
Prior proceeding
Mediation succeeded; report of the mediator dated 24.10.2025 received; towards full and final settlement the Petitioner handed over a cheque of Rs.1,25,00,000/- dated 22.10.2025 to the Claimant-Opposite Party No.2.¶¶18
Prior proceeding
Joint affidavit filed by the parties before the learned Mediator recording the settlement and their agreement that the settlement shall bring an end to all disputes and that they shall take steps for withdrawal of the criminal complaints against each other.¶¶18
Prior proceeding
Before this Court, learned counsel for the Informant admitted receipt of Rs.1,25,00,000/- towards full and final settlement, stated the Complainant-Opposite Party No.2 does not want to proceed further, and offered no objection to quashing; learned counsel for the State also raised no objection.¶¶20

Suresh Kumar Sharma v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar Sharma v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita @ Santoshini Behera Vs State of Odisha

Bikash Chandra Swain Vs State of Odisha

Nabin Kumar Satapathy Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

Sita Kar Vs State of Odisha

Bijay Kumar Mohanta Vs State of Odisha

Sanjaya Kumar Bhatta @ Tulia Vs State of Odisha