Chitta Ranjan Sahoo@Taini Vs State of Odisha

2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. in connection with Chauliaganj P.S. Case No.296 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1199 of 2022 came to be registered against the petitioners for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 341/294/427/506/34 of the IPC, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C. (Cog. Taking)-IV, Cuttack.

¶14

3. The opposite party No.2 reported at P.S. alleging

¶15

Page 1 of 6

¶16

therein that, on 11.09.2022 evening, while he was returning to his house from his duty, he saw the members of the Tarini Club celebrating the immersion ceremony of Lord Ganesha. At that time, the accused persons blocked the vehicle of the informant and restrained him illegally, abused him in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the F.I.R.

¶17

4. After the investigation, the charge sheet has been filed on 20.11.2022 for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 341/ 294/ 427/ 506/34 of the IPC. Subsequent thereto, the learned Court below has also taken cognizance of the offences as mentioned above.

¶18

5. Before the charge is framed and the trial is commenced, the parties have arrived at a settlement at the intervention of the village gentries and wellwishers. On the basis of the settlement terms, the present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceeding.

¶19

6. The petitioners and the opposite party No.2 are present in the Court today. They are being represented by their respective counsel and identified by them. They have also filed the photocopies of their respective Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record.

¶20

7 . They have filed the joint affidavit dated

¶21

26.03.2025, inter alia , stating as under:

¶22

Page 2 of 6

¶23

“1. That the undersigned parties, being the Petitioners and Opp.Party No.2/Informant in the above-mentioned criminal case, hereby submit this Joint Compromise Affidavit for quashing of the criminal proceeding, on the grounds of an amicable settlement between the parties.

¶24

2. That the Opp. Party no. 2 had filed a case bearing Chaulaganj P.S. Case No. 296 of 2022 arising out of G.R Case No. 1199 of 2022 pending in the file of the learned J.M.F.C.(Cog. Taking)-IV, Cuttack, for the commission of the alleged offences punishable under sections U/s. 294,341,427,506,34 of IPC against the Petitioners.

¶25

3. That the said FIR was filed due the previous dispute between the parties, and the Opp. Party No 2, being the informant, due to the said enmity the present case was instituted on. The misunderstandings and disputes that led to the filing of the FIR have been amicably resolved between the respective parties.

¶26

6. That the informant/Opp. party no. 02 has. по objection if the criminal proceeding is quashed in against the petitioners at this present stage.

¶27

7. That in light of the above, the respective parties jointly pray before this Hon'ble Court to consider the joint affidavit for quashing of the criminal proceeding Chauliaganj P.S. Case No. 296 of 2022 arising out of G.R Case No. 1199 of 2022 pending in the file of the learned J.M.F.C.(Cog. Taking)-IV, Cuttack,. The present petitioners as well as the Opp. Party No. 2 believe that continuing with the legal proceedings would be detrimental to the welfare of the family and would serve no constructive purpose.

¶28

8. That the present petitioners, and Opp. Party No 2, have voluntarily and amicably reached a settlement in the matter in dispute between them, and wish to inform this Hon'ble Court of their joint decision to resolve the issues without further legal proceedings.

¶29

9. That the mother of the appellant and Opp. Party No 2, have engaged in meaningful discussions

¶30

Page 3 of 6

¶31

and negotiations, and have voluntarily reached an amicable settlement to resolve the disputes arising out of the criminal proceedings.

¶32

10. That both parties understand the implications of the settlement and willingly agree to the terms and conditions stated herein.

¶33

11. That the Opp. Party No 2 hereby declares that he no longer wishes to proceed with the criminal case against the present petitioners because the FIR was filed under a sudden aggression, the Opp. party no. 02 was fully aware of the true facts and due to which the said case was instituted.

¶34

12. That it is humbly submitted here that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the the criminal proceeding Chauliaganj P.S. Case No. 296 of 2022 arising out of G.R Case No. 1199 of 2022 which is pending in the file of the learned J.M.F.C.(Cog. Taking)-IV, Cuttack, in the interest of justice, as the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties.

¶35

13. That it is further appropriate to note here that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, quashing the impugned the criminal proceeding Chauliaganj P.S. Case No. 296 of 2022 arising out G.R Case No. 1199 of 2022 which is arising out of pending in the file of the learned J.M.F.C.(Cog. Taking)-IV, Cuttack, against the petitioners.

¶36

14. That the conditions constitute the mutually agreed-upon terms of the amicable settlement, and both parties commit to abide by them in good faith.

¶37

15. That the affidavit is drawn by both the parties for the purpose of compromising their disputes in CRLMC No. 681 of 2025 and they shall have no claims as against each other.

¶38

8. The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 have filed separate affidavits reiterating their stand. The

¶39

Page 4 of 6

¶40

opposite party No.2, who is present in person before this Court, on the query from the Court, states that he has registered the F.I.R. against the petitioners on sudden provocation and misunderstanding. However, on the intervention of the local gentries and wellwishers, they have settled their dispute. In order to maintain peace and tranquility in the area, he does not want to prosecute the petitioners any more.

¶41

9. Mr. Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the opposite party No.1-State submits that the nature of the allegations are not serious in nature and the parties have settled their dispute. They have filed affidavit before this Court to that effect. Therefore, there is no legal impediment in quashing the present F.I.R.

¶42

10. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have settled their dispute and the nature of allegations against the petitioners, I am of the considered view that subjecting the petitioners to the rigors of the trial in the fact scenario of the present case would be a futile exercise. Therefore, the present case is squarely covered by the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303; B.S. Joshi & others v. State of Haryana & another, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia & another v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and others ,

¶43

Page 5 of 6

¶44

reported in AIR 1988 SC 709, therefore, the petition deserves merit.

¶45

11. Taking into consideration the aforementioned judgments, the facts of the case and submissions made at the Bar, the F.I.R. in connection with Chauliaganj P.S. Case No.296 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1199 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C. (Cog. Taking)-IV, Cuttack and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed, subject to the petitioners paying cost of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand). Out of Rs.20,000/-, Rs.10,000/(Rupees ten thousand) shall be paid to the opposite party No.2 and the remaining Rs.10,000/(Rupees ten thousand) shall be paid to the High Court of Orissa Advocates’ Welfare Fund.

¶46

12. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.

¶47

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶48

Subhasis

¶49

Signature Not Verified

¶50

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 11-Apr-2025 18:55:29

¶51

Page 6 of 6

Chitta Ranjan Sahoo@Taini v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chitta Ranjan Sahoo@Taini 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S R.v.Enterprisers Pvt. Ltd., Khurda Vs State of Odisha

Shaktiman Pihan Vs State of Odisha

M/S.Manappuram Finance Ltd. Vs State of Odisha

Harihar Kharasudha Vs State

Santosh @ Sagar Panda @ Santosh Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha

Gandharb Moharana Vs Kailash Moharana