Milu Lenka@Sudhansu Lenka Vs State of Odisha

the F.I.R. and the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Barang P.S. Case No.345 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1003 of 2025 for commission of offences under Sections 3 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act now pending before the learned Court of J.M.F.C.-II (Cog. Taking), Cuttack.

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

// 2 //

¶16

3. Heard.

¶17

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Opposite Party No.2 who was the Supervisor of the Company had lodged the F.I.R. considering the explosion of the explosive substance in front of the gate of the Company Office. Later, both the parties have reconciled their differences on the intervention of the local gentries and wanted to bury their differences. Accordingly, a affidavit has been filed by the Opposite Party No.2/Informant stating therein that dispute between them has amicably been settled on the intervention of local gentries and they are working in a congenial atmosphere in the same company.

¶18

5. Considering the seriousness of allegation, this Court ordinarily does not condone such act by allowing the Compromise Petition. But, there has been compromise between the workers of the company and the livelihood of the workers is at stake and unnecessarily cases and counter cases spoil the congenial atmosphere of the work place.

¶19

6. It is well settled that although the offence under Sections 3 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act. is non-

¶20

Page 2 of 4

¶21

// 3 //

¶22

compoundable, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., is not denuded of power to quash the criminal proceeding where the dispute is essentially private and matrimonial in nature and the parties have voluntarily arrived at a genuine and complete settlement. The underlying object of such exercise is to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. Where the continuation of the criminal proceeding, despite an amicable settlement, would serve no fruitful purpose and would only perpetuate bitterness between the parties, the High Court would be justified in interdicting the prosecution, particularly when the informant herself has unequivocally expressed her consent for such quashing.

¶23

7. Considering the contents of the joint affidavit filed by the Opposite Party No.2/informant and following the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another¹ , and two other reported cases of this Court in Lokanath @ Anadi Sethi and four others v. State of Orissa and four others² , and Sansuri alias Khageswar Lenka and another –vrs.- State of

¶24

1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

¶25

2 2014 (II) OLR 29

¶26

Page 3 of 4

¶27

// 4 //

¶28

Orissa and Another³ , this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served in allowing such proceedings to continue the criminal proceeding in the aforesaid case as it will only lead to abuse the process of law.

¶29

8. In view of the aforesaid discussion and considerations, the application is allowed. Accordingly, the Criminal Proceedings in connection with Barang P.S. Case No.345 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1003 of 2025 for commission of offences under Sections 3 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act now pending before the learned Court of J.M.F.C.-II (Cog. Taking), Cuttack, is hereby quashed. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶30

9. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated.

¶31

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)

¶32

Sumitra

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIgh Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 16-Jan-2026 18:05:513 2014 (II) OLR 452

¶35

Page 4 of 4

Milu Lenka@Sudhansu Lenka v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Milu Lenka@Sudhansu Lenka 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

Bikram Swain Vs State of Odisha

Sk.Sona Vs State of Odisha

Rabindra Jena@Kalia Vs State of Odisha

Somanath Behera Vs State of Odisha

State Vs Deba@Dinesh@Debendra

Shivani Mahapatra Vs Sumangalam Catering and Events, Khurda