Abdul Siraj v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC13 May 2025CRLMC/422/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack (Savitri Ratho, J., 13.05.2025), CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 & CRLMC No. 422 of 2025: criminal proceedings arising from an intra-family dispute over a residential house (IPC Ss. 341/323/294/506/34 and 341/323/294/427/506/34) quashed on account of amicable settlement, consent decree in C.S. (I) No. 606 of 2020, informant affidavits and IIC report confirming peace and harmony; no precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 and CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 allowed and disposed of; proceedings in G.R. Case No. 742 of 2024 (Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024) and G.R. Case No. 739 of 2024 (Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 133 of 2024) quashed. ¶¶71

Abdul Siraj Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶71

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings arising out of Dargha Bazar P.S. Case Nos. 130 and 133 of 2024 (G.R. Case Nos. 742 and 739 of 2024) should be quashed in view of the amicable settlement between the related parties, the decreed civil suit, the informants' affidavits and the police report confirming peace and harmony.

¶¶19

Court's answer

In light of the prevailing peace between the parties, the amicable resolution of the civil dispute, the informants' affidavits expressing no objection, and the IIC report confirming settlement, continuation of the proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would waste the Court's time and resources; quashing would be in the interest of justice.

¶¶66

Ratio / Principle

The proceeding in G.R. Case No. 742 of 2024 arising out of Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024 and the proceeding in G.R. Case No. 739 of 2024 arising out of Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 133 of 2024, both pending before the learned JMFC-II (cog. taking), Cuttack, are quashed.

¶¶70

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of criminal proceedings — inherent jurisdiction (S. 482 Cr.P.C. corresponding to S. 582 BNSS 2023) — cross-FIRs (Dargha Bazar P.S. Case Nos. 130 & 133 of 2024; G.R. Case Nos. 742 & 739 of 2024, offences under Sections 341, 323, 294, 506, 34 IPC and Sections 341, 323, 294, 427, 506, 34 IPC) lodged by related parties over a residential house transferred to Petitioners 1-3 by Registered Sale Deed No.2704 dated 17.05.2015 — dispute amicably resolved: memorandum of settlement dated 30.8.2024 filed in C.S. (I) No. 606 of 2020 and suit decreed; both informants filed affidavits expressing no objection to quashing; IIC, Dargha Bazaar Police (report dated 12.05.2025) confirmed settlement, cordial relations and peace — held, continuation of the proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would waste the Court's time and resources; both proceedings quashed; petitions allowed and disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 & CRLMC No. 422 of 2025

¶3

Applications under section 582 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.S), 2023 corresponding to section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C).

¶4

CRLMC No. 415 of 2025

¶5

1. Abdul Riyaz 2. Abdul Imtiyaz 3. Abdul Raju 4. Abdul Aeyshan @ Aejham 5. Rizwana Khatun 6. Safia Riyaz @ Riaz 7. Aisha Begum ….. Petitioners

¶6

Mr. Nalini Kanta Dash, Advocate -versus- 1.State of Odisha ….. Opp. Parties 2.Tarunum Begum Mr. S. N. Biswal, A.S.C Mr. Ranjan Kumar Nayak, Advocate (for O.P. No.2-informant)

¶7

CRLMC No. 422 of 2025

¶8

1. Abdul Siraj 2. Taranum Begum 3. Sk. Meheboob 4. Hasina Bibi 5. Nazarana Mukhtar …… Petitioners

¶9

Mr. Ranjan Kumar Nayak, Advocate -versus-

¶10

1.State of Odisha 2.Lelun Nisha

¶11

……

¶12

Opp. Parties

¶13

Mr. S. N. Biswal, A.S.C Mr. Nalini Kanta Dash, Advocate (for O.P. No.2-informant)

¶14

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶15

Page 1 of 9

¶16

CORAM:

¶17

HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

¶18

JUDGMENT 13.05 .2025

¶19

Savitri Ratho, J. CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 has been filed for quashing the order of cognizance dated 03.07.2024 passed by the learned JMFC-II (Cog. Taking), Cuttack in G.R. Case No. 742 of 2024 arising out of Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024 for the commission of offences under Sections 341,

¶20

323, 294, 506 and 34 of IPC.

¶21

2. CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 has been filed for quashing the order of cognizance dated 05.07.2024 passed by the learned JMFC-II (Cog. Taking), Cuttack in G.R. Case No. 739 of 2024 arising out of Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 133 of 2024 for the commission of offences under Sections 341, 323, 294, 427, 506 and 34 of IPC.

¶22

BACKGROUND

¶23

3. That, the Petitioners and the Opposite Party No.2 in both CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 and CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 are related to each other. Taranum Begum - the informant in Dargha Bazaar P.S. case No 130 of 2024 and Opposite Party No.2 in CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 is the sister in law of Petitioners No. 1 to 3 (wife of their brother Abdul Siraj). Lelun Nisha - the

¶24

informant in Dargha Bazaar P.S. Case No.133 of 2024 (Opposite Party No. 2

¶25

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶26

Page 2 of 9

¶27

in CRLMC No. 422 of 2025) is mother of the Petitioners No. 1 to 3 in CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 and also mother of Petitioner No.1 in CRLMC No. 422 of 2025. They were residing under the same roof along with their families till the end of June, 2024. Abdul Gaffar (father of the Petitioners No.l to 3 in CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 and father of Petitioner No.1 in CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 and husband of Opposite Party No.2 in CRLMC No. 422 of 2025) had purchased the plot, on which the residential house of the parties is constructed, in the year 1978. In the year 2015, Abdul Gaffar wanted to sell the said property to meet his personal expenses, for which his three sons - Petitioners No. l to 3, with an intention to retain the parental asset, offered the proposal to their father to sell the property to them instead of to an outsider.

¶28

That, accordingly vide Registered Sale Deed No.2704 dated 17.05.2015, Abdul Gaffar transferred the property in favour of the Petitioners No. l to 3. Opposite Party No.2 and her husband were allowed to stay under the same roof for a temporary period, until they could arrange their alternate place of residence. But the Opposite Party No.2 and her husband, did not vacate the house and started creating disturbances. Despite several requests made to the Opposite Party No.2 and her husband, they did not vacate the house and a result of which the Petitioners no. l to 3 filed a Civil Suit bearing C.S. (I)

¶29

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶30

Page 3 of 9

¶31

No.606/2020 before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court, Cuttack seeking a declaration and permanent injunction against their brother – Abdul Siraj (husband of the Opposite Party No 2 in CRLMC No. 415 of 2025). The

¶32

FIRs were filed during pendency of the Civil Suit. Pursuant to a settlement between the parties, a memorandum of settlement dated 30.8.2024 was filed in the suit and the suit has been decreed. The memorandum of settlement and

¶33

judgment in C.S. No. 606 of 2020 have been annexed to the CRLMCs.

¶34

PREVIOUS ORDERS OF THIS COURT

¶35

4. On 30.04.2025, in CRLMC No. 415 of 2025, it had been observed as follows : -

¶36

“2. Mr. Nalini Kanta Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are related to each other as well as the informant and on account of civil dispute and a small misunderstanding, the FIR has been lodged. He also submits that Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 133 of 2024 had been registered against Taranu Begum-opposite party no.2 in this case and others on the same day. But in the meanwhile due to intervention of their relatives and well-wishers, the matter has been settled. He further submits that a Civil Suit No. 606 of 2020 has been filed by petitioner nos.1 to 3 against the petitioner in CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 and the same has been decreed in terms of the compromise between the parties. He further submits that the matter has been settled between the petitioners in CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 and

¶37

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶38

Page 4 of 9

¶39

CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 and as they are related to each other, the proceedings in G.R. Case No. 742 of 2024 may be quashed.

¶40

3. Mr. Ranjan Kumar Nayak, learned counsel submits that he has instruction to appear on behalf of the informant and shall file Vakalatnama by Friday (02.05.2025) along with an affidavit.

¶41

4. Considering the said submission, list this case on 03.05.2025 along with CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 and affidavits if any.”

¶42

5. The affidavits were filed in both CRLMC no. 415 of 2025 and CRLMC

¶43

422 of 2025, for which on 05.05.2025, this Court had directed the learned State Counsel in both the CRLMCs to obtain instruction through the IIC of

¶44

Dargha Bazaar Police Station, if the matters had been settled between the parties and they were living in peace and harmony.

¶45

6. The relevant portion of the order passed on. 05.05.2025 in CRLMC No 415 of 2025 is extracted below : -

¶46

“2. Pursuant to the order dated 30.04.2025, the informantopposite party no.2 has filed an affidavit stating that on account of civil dispute between the accused persons and her family member, F.I.R. had been lodged but at present they are having a cordial relation and peace and harmony is prevailing amongst them for which she does not want to proceed with the criminal case against her brother-in-law, sister-in-law and nephew. He further submits that the petitioners in response to the notice under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C., have executed bond for their appearance.

¶47

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶48

Page 5 of 9

¶49

3. Copy of the affidavit is served on Mr. U.R. Jena, learned Additional Government Advocate to enable him to obtain instructions from the IIC, Dargha Bazar, Cuttack regarding the settlement between the parties and if they are living in peace and harmony.”

¶50

7. The relevant portion of the order passed on. 05.05.2025 in CRLMC No

¶51

422 of 2025 is extracted below : -

¶52

“2. Pursuant to the order dated 30.04.2025, affidavit has been filed by the opposite party no.2-informant stating that F.I.R. had been lodged against her middle son and his wife and their in-laws on account of civil dispute between her sons which has been resolved. At present they are having a cordial relation and living in peace and harmony for which she does not want to proceed with the criminal case against her middle son, his wife and his in-laws. He further submits that the petitioners in response to the notice under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C., have executed bond for their appearance.

¶53

¶54

8. The IIC, Dargha Bazaar Police vide its report dated 12.05.2025 has stated

¶55

that the civil dispute has been resolved and are maintaining cordial relation and there is peace and harmony between them. The report dated 12.05.2015 which

¶56

is filed in Court is taken on record. It shall be scanned and incorporated in the

¶57

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶58

Page 6 of 9

¶59

digital record by the Registry. Affidavits were genuine and dispute between the parties has been settled and they are living peacefully .

¶60

SUBMISSIONS

¶61

9. Mr. Nalini Kanta Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners in CRLMC No. 415 of 2020 and Opposite Party No.2 in CRLMC No. 422 of 2025 submits that the parties are related to each other. There was a civil dispute between them relating to a residential house. Thereafter, on the intervention of their elderly relations, the parties have amicably resolved their inter se dispute, and as a consequence thereof, a consent decree dated 24.08.2024 has been recorded before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Cuttack, in C.S. (I) No. 606 of 2020. Opposite party No.2informant along with her husband, has moved out of the house and is now residing separately from the Petitioners. As a result peace and tranquillity is prevailing among the parties and Opposite Party No.2 does not want to proceed in the case against the Petitioners.

¶62

10. Mr. R. K. Nayak, learned counsel for the Petitioner in CRMC No. 422 of 2025 and the Opposite Party No.2 in CRLMC No 415 of 2025, makes the same submission regarding settlement.

¶63

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶64

Page 7 of 9

¶65

11. Both counsel submit that in view of the fact of settlement, the informants have no objection if the two proceedings are quashed and the proceedings may be quashed in the interest of justice. It is further submitted that, in light of the amicable settlement reached between the parties and the prevailing peace and harmony, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. In fact if the proceedings are not quashed, the dispute which has been amicably resolved, may get revived.

¶66

12. Considering the said submissions of the learned counsel and the orders dated 30.04.2025 and 05.05.2025 and the joint affidavit by parties, it is evident that the parties are related to each other. The two criminal proceedings were initiated because of civil dispute between the parties. This dispute has been amicably resolved and the civil suit has been decreed. In the affidavits, informants have expressed no objection to quashing of the two proceedings. The report of the IIC, Dargha Bazaar Police Station confirms such amicable settlement and that the parties are staying in harmony. In light of the prevailing peace between the parties and the absence of any further grievance, I am of the view that continuation of the proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Rather valuable time and resources of the Court may be wasted if the proceedings are allowed to continue. Therefore, it would be in the intertest of justice if both the proceedings are quashed.

¶67

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶68

Page 8 of 9

¶69

13. In view of the nature of dispute and amicable settlement between the

¶70

parties, the proceeding in G.R. Case No. 742 of 2024 arising out of Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024 and the proceeding in G.R. Case No. 739 of 2024 arising out of Dargha Bazar P.S. Case No. 133 of 2024, both pending in the Court of the learned JMFC-II (cog. taking), Cuttack are quashed.

¶71

14. CRLMC No. 415 of 2025 and CRKMC No. 422 of 20025 are accordingly allowed and disposed of.

¶72

………………………

¶73

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶74

Orissa High Court, Cuttack. The 13^th May, 2025 /Subhalaxmi/Puspa

¶75

Signature Not Verified

¶76

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 25-May-2025 15:21:02

¶77

CRLMC No.415 of 2025 & 422 of 2025

¶78

Page 9 of 9

Abdul Siraj v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Siraj 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

Dhananjaya Mahakud Vs Gitanjali Mohakud

Sanjay Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Pitabasa Mahali Vs Republic of India(Cbi)

Keshab Behera Vs Pabitra Sahoo

Sunakanta@Suryakanta Dhir Vs State of Odisha

Prasana Routray @ Prashanta Kumar Routray Vs State of Odisha