Sumanta Kumar Nayak Vs the State of Odisha

2. In filing the present CRLMC, the Petitioner being the erstwhile Reader in the Commerce Department of the NSM City College, Cuttack and against whom the allegation of cheating and committing fraud for getting personal benefit is made, has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding initiated against him vide G.R. Case No.307 of 2023 pending before the Court of learned J.M.F.C (City), Cuttack including the impugned orders dated 29.08.2023/ Annexure-9 and dated 12.08.2025/ Annexure-10 passed in the said G.R. Case.

¶13

3. Heard.

¶14

Signature Not Verified 4. The brief fact of the case in brevity remains:-

¶15

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of O rissa Date: 15-Jul-2026 18:28:42

¶16

Page 1 of 5

¶17

i. The present Petitioner while discharging an additional duty of Associate NCC Officer (ANO) in the NSM City College, Cuttack, had committed forgery in order to extend his tenure in the said post. He had submitted false medical fitness certificate in order to get the said benefit up to 28.12.2024. He had also manipulated the letter of the Principal, NSM City College, Cuttack. On being informed about the said manipulations, the Principal, NSM City College, Cuttack lodged an F.I.R before the local Police Station. Soon after lodging of the F.I.R and completion of investigation, the Petitioner was booked for the above noted offences.

¶18

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the criminal proceeding in question has been maliciously instituted owing to prior animosity between the parties. It is contended that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated and bears no nexus whatsoever with the offences alleged in the impugned FIR. Learned counsel emphatically asserts that the Petitioner has never committed any forgery to get his tenure extended. According to him, continuation of the criminal proceeding would amount to an abuse of the process of Court and result in undue harassment to the Petitioner.

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of O rissa Date: 15-Jul-2026 18:28:42

¶21

Page 2 of 5

¶22

On these premises, he prays that this Court may be pleased to allow the relief sought in the present CRLMC and quash the impugned proceeding in the interest of justice.

¶23

6. In opposition, learned counsel for the State submits that pursuant to registration of the F.I.R., investigation has been duly conducted and culminated in submission of charge-sheet against the Petitioner. At this juncture, drawing the attention of this Court to the communication dated 17.04.2023 made by the Prof. & HOD, Medicine, SCB MCH, Cuttack, learned counsel for the State submits that pursuant to the direction of the authority concerned, it has been clarified by the Prof. & HOD, Medicine SCB MCH, Cuttack that the Medical Fitness Certificate submitted by the Petitioner in order to extend his tenure for the above noted post is false and fabricated. It is also contended that because of the non-cooperation of the Petitioner, trial in the above noted case is running in a senile pace which is not conducive to the criminal justice system. He, accordingly, prays for dismissal of this CRLMC.

¶24

7. Learned counsel further submits that the veracity of the allegations, the defence plea of prior enmity, and the question of false implication are all matters to be adjudicated upon evidence during the course of trial.

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of O rissa Date: 15-Jul-2026 18:28:42

¶27

Page 3 of 5

¶28

According to him, premature interference would stifle a legitimate prosecution. He, accordingly, prays for dismissal of the present CRLMC.

¶29

8. Having considered the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the materials available on record, this Court finds that the investigation has culminated in submission of charge-sheet. At this juncture, the question as to whether the Petitioner has in fact committed the offences alleged against him is essentially a matter to be adjudicated upon appreciation of evidence during trial.

¶30

9. It is trite that evaluation of factual controversies, assessment of credibility of witnesses, and appreciation of evidence fall squarely within the domain of the trial court. The inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not intended to supplant the statutory procedure of trial or to conduct a mini-trial at the pre-trial stage.

¶31

10. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection, and only in rare cases where the complaint or charge-sheet on its face discloses no offence, or where there exists a legal bar to the institution or continuance of the proceeding, or where continuation of the prosecution would amount to a manifest abuse of the process of Court. In the absence of

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of O rissa Date: 15-Jul-2026 18:28:42

¶34

Page 4 of 5

¶35

such exceptional circumstances, judicial restraint must prevail.

¶36

11. In the present case, this Court does not find any patent illegality, jurisdictional error, or legal embargo warranting interference. The defence plea of prior enmity and false implication are matters to be established before the learned trial court in accordance with law.

¶37

12. At this juncture, considering the submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court permits the Petitioner to file a petition for discharge before the learned Court in seisin over the matter at appropriate stage, which shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law.

¶38

13. This CRLMC is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶39

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge

¶40

Ayaskanta

¶41

Signature Not Verified

¶42

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of O rissa Date: 15-Jul-2026 18:28:42

¶43

Page 5 of 5

Sumanta Kumar Nayak v. the State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumanta Kumar Nayak v. the 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

Trilochan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Chumki Naik@Madhabi Naik Vs State of Odisha

Krushna Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Debendra Kumar Bag Vs State of Odisha

Sanjay Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Sanjaya Kumar Padhi Vs State of Odisha