Orissa High Court
Jeevanjyoti Mohanty vs ) State Of Odisha ….. Opposite Parties on 21 July, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.326 of 2025
Jeevanjyoti Mohanty ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Binayak Prasad
Mohanty
-versus-
1) State of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2) Annapurna Mishra @ Represented By Adv. -
Arnapurna Patri Mr. U.C. Jena, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
21.07.2025
Order No.
04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the
documents annexed thereto.
3. By filing a present writ petition, the Petitioner has invoked the
inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
thereby challenging the impugned order of cognizance dated
22.09.2023 passed by the learned J.M.F.C. (Cog.II), Puri in G.R.
Case No.392 of 2023 and has made a further prayer to quash the
entire criminal proceeding, arising out of the aforesaid G.R. Case.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that
as agreed by the learned counsel for the parties, the matter was
referred to District Mediation Centre, Puri by virtue of order dated
Page 1 of 3.
17.04.2025 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court. Learned
counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the learned Mediator
has submitted a report in the meantime.
5. On Perusal of the copy of the report of the Mediator dated
25.04.2025, it appears that the matter has been settled amicably
between both sides. Moreover, on a careful examination of the
allegation made, it appears that the present criminal case was initiated
at the instance of Informant for alleged commission of offences
punishable under Sections 341/294/323/447/325/448/506/34 of I.P.C.
However, vide order dated 22.09.2023, cognizance has been taken
under Sections 341/294/323/447/448/506/34 of the I.P.C. In such
view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that
the order taking cognizance as well as entire proceeding be quashed
taking into consideration the Mediation Report submitted by the
District Mediation Centre.
6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended
that although he has no specific instruction in the matter, however,
this Court may pass necessary order taking into consideration the
Mediation Report submitted by the District Mediation Centre, Puri
and he will have no objection to the same.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties and on a careful examination of the materials on record as
well as the background facts of the present case, further upon a
consideration of the Mediation Report dated 25.04.2025, this Court is
of the view that the offence under Section 294 of I.P.C. is not
compoundable. Accordingly, the same is hereby quashed.
8. Further, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been
amicably settled between the parties, Petitioner and the Opposite
Page 2 of 3.
Party No.2 are given liberty to move the trial court by filing an
application under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. within four weeks from
today. In such eventuality, trial court shall pass necessary order on
such application keeping in view the report of the Mediator after
providing an opportunity of hearing to both the sides within a period
of two months from the date of filing such application.
9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the CRLMC
stands disposed of.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)
Judge
Debasis
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: DEBASIS AECH
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT
Date: 23-Jul-2025 19:50:34
Page 3 of 3.
[ad_1]
Source link