Allowed¶27

Angurbala Sahu@Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Nov 2025CRLREV/506/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack; CRLREV No.506 of 2025; Angurbala Sahu @ Sahoo & others v. State of Odisha & another; Justice R.K. Pattanaik; order dated 10.11.2025; challenge to order of cognizance dated 28.04.2025 in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 (S.D.J.M., Keonjhar); offences under Sections 296, 126(2), 115(2), 74, 351(3) & 3(5) BNS; compoundable offences; successful mediation at High Court Mediation Centre, Cuttack on 10.10.2025; joint compromise affidavit; revision allowed; cognizance order set aside; proceeding directed to be dropped forthwith; advocates A. Dash, S.K. Swain (AGA), S.K. Parida.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition allowed; impugned order of cognizance dated 28th April, 2025 in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 set aside; learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar directed to drop the proceeding forthwith. ¶27

Angurbala Sahu@Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Revision petition allowed; impugned order of cognizance dated 28th April, 2025 in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 set aside; learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar directed to drop the proceeding forthwith.

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the successful mediation and settlement between the parties and the contention that the alleged offences are compoundable, the impugned order of cognizance dated 28th April, 2025 in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 should be set aside and the criminal proceedings discontinued.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The Court found that the matter has been settled between the parties in view of the mediation held on 10th October, 2025.

¶21

Key takeaways

In the interest of justice and to restore peace among the parties, the impugned order at Annexure-2 should be set aside, as no real purpose would be served by allowing the case in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 to continue after the settlement arrived at between the petitioners and opposite party No.1.ratio¶25
The revision petition stands allowed and the impugned order dated 28th April, 2025 passed in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 is set aside.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision (CRLREV No.506 of 2025) before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (R.K. Pattanaik, J.) challenging the order of cognizance dated 28th April, 2025 in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar, whereby the petitioners were alleged to have committed offences under Sections 296, 126(2), 115(2), 74, 351(3) & 3(5) BNS. Following a successful mediation at the High Court Mediation Centre, Cuttack (held on 10th October, 2025) and a joint compromise affidavit filed by the petitioners and opposite party No.2, and noting counsel's submission that all the offences are compoundable, the Court set aside the impugned order of cognizance in the interest of justice and to restore peace between the parties, allowed the revision petition and directed the learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar to drop the proceeding forthwith.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLREV No.506 of 2025

¶3

Angurbala Sahu @ Sahoo & …. Petitioners others

¶4

Mr. A. Dash, Advocate

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & another

¶7

…. Opposite Parties

¶8

Mr. S.K. Swain, AGA

¶9

Mr. S.K. Parida, Advocate (O.P. No.2)

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

10.11.2025

Order No.

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶17

Instant revision petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the impugned order of cognizance dated 28^th April, 2025 passed in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 by learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar on the grounds stated.

¶18

The matter was referred to the High Court Mediation Centre at Cuttack. The mediation report is received and the same is at Flag-E, which shows that the mediation has been successful.

¶19

Today, a joint affidavit is filed by the petitioners and opposite party No.2 and the same is perused. In fact, on behalf of petitioner Nos.2 & 3, the affidavit is filed by petitioner No.1 being so authorized. Considering the affidavit, the Court finds

¶20

Page 1 of 2

¶21

that the matter has been settled between the parties in view of the mediation held on 10^th October, 2025.

¶22

Recorded the submission of Mr. Swain, learned AGA for the State.

¶23

The petitioners are alleged to have committed offences under Sections 296, 126(2), 115(2), 74, 351(3) & 3(5) BNS.

¶24

It is submitted by Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioners that all the offences are compoundable in nature.

¶25

In view of the settlement reached at with the mediation being successful as per the report at Flag-E, recording the submissions of learned counsels appearing from both the sides and for the joint compromise affidavit filed today, the Court is of the view that in the interest of justice and to restore peace among the parties, the impugned order at Annexure-2 should be set aside, as no real purpose be served allowing the case in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 to continue after the settlement having been arrived at between the petitioners and opposite party No.1.

¶26

Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶27

In the result, the revision petition stands allowed. Consequently, the impugned the impugned order dated 28^th April, 2025 passed in G.R. Case No.537 of 2025 is hereby set aside with a direction to the learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar to drop the proceeding forthwith.

¶28

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally SignedSigned by: ALOK RANJAN SETHY (R.K. Pattanaik)

¶31

Reason: AuthenticationLocation: ORISSA HIGH COURT Judge Alok

¶32

Date: 11-Nov-2025 12:41:46 Page 2 of 2

¶33

Page 2 of 2

Angurbala Sahu@Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Angurbala Sahu@Sahoo 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

[email protected] Kalla Vs State of Odisha

Nepal Prakash Samanta Vs Bijay Kumar Dash,Commnr., C.M.C, Cuttack

Sumanta Kumar Apat Vs Hrudananda Adha, B.D.O,Jhumpura,Keonjhar

Santosh Panigrahi Vs Collector ,Rayagada

T.Nagbhusan Rao Vs Collector, Rayagada

Bapina Patra@Bapi Kumar Patra Vs State of Odisha