Quashed

Rebati Naik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Sept 2026CRLMC/1524/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Odisha quashed the FIR and criminal proceedings against the petitioner's husband, relying on a settlement report from a successful mediation, ruling that further proceedings would constitute an abuse of the process of law.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceeding bearing Harabhanga P.S. Case No.116 of 2023 and corresponding C.T. Case No.264 of 2023 are quashed.

Rebati Naik Vs State of Odisha — Matrimonial and Divorce | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.1524 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010334152026

Rebati Naik

.....

Petitioner

Represented by Adv. - Sasmita Nanda

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & Anr.

¶8

.....

¶9

Opposite Parties

¶10

Represented by Adv. -Mr. U.R.Jena, A.G.A.

¶11

M/S Kaberi Mohanty, Adv. for O.P.2

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

09.09.2026

Order No.

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

¶18

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner-Informant as well as the learned for the Opposite Party No.2-husband and learned counsel for the State. Perused the CRLMC application as well as the prayer made therein.

¶19

By filing the present application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the informant in Harabhanga P.S. Case No.116 of 2023, registered for commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 294, 323, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C., corresponding to C.T. Case No.264 of 2023, presently pending in the file of the learned J.M.F.C., Harabhanga, has approached this Court seeking quashing

¶20

of the F.I.R. as well as the consequential criminal proceeding

¶21

Page 1 of 3.

¶22

pending against Opposite Party No.2.

¶23

Learned counsel for the informant-Petitioner, at the outset, contended that the Petitioner is the wife of the Opposite Party No.2. She further contended that the marriage between the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 took place 14 years ago and initially they were staying peacefully. Thereafter, a matrimonial discord arose between the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2. As a result of which, the informant-Petitioner lodged the F.I.R. making allegations against the Opposite Party No.2-husband. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the dispute between the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 in the pending criminal case was referred to the mediation under the mediation “For the Nation Campaign 2.0” by the learned trial court. In such mediation proceeding, the mediation between the parties became successful. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the report of the Mediator, at Annexure-3 to the application and in view of the aforesaid settlement arrived at during the mediation proceeding, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the further continuance of the present criminal case would be an abuse of the process of law and that the Petitioner does not want to proceed further in the pending criminal case before the learned trial court.

¶24

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 supported the stand taken by the learned counsel for the Petitioner-informant. She further submitted that the Petitioner will abide by the terms and conditions recorded in the mediation report at Annexure-3 to the present application.

¶25

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submitted that since the matter has already been settled in the mediation proceeding and the Petitioner-informant does not want to proceed

¶26

Page 2 of 3.

¶27

further in this matter, he will have no objection in the event this Court passes any order to secure the ends of justice.

¶28

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background fact as well as the fact that the dispute between the parties has already been resolved in the mediation proceeding and that the parties are aggregable to the terms and conditions laid out in such proceeding. Further, taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioner-informant is not interested in proceeding further, this Court is of the considered view that any further continuance of the proceeding would not only be an abuse of the process of law, but also result in huge wastage of valuable time of Court. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, this Court is inclined to interfere in the present proceeding in exercise of its inherent power. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding bearing Harabhanga P.S. Case No.116 of 2023, corresponding to C.T. Case No.264 of 2023, is hereby quashed.

¶29

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the CRLMC stands disposed of.

¶30

(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)

Judge

Rubi

Page 3 of 3.

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 11-Sep-2026 17:07:28

Rebati Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rebati Naik 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