PUNYA PRASUN MOHANTY v. STATE OF ODISHA
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2025-12-17. PUNYA PRASUN MOHANTY v. STATE OF ODISHA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No. 4138 of 2025 Punya Prasun Mohanty ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Subash Chandra Puspalaka -versus- State Of Odisha and another ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Bikash Chandra Parija Mr. S. K. Parhi, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 17. 12. 2025 Order No. 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Informant and learned counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. By filing the present application under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. , which corresponds to Section 528 of BNSS, the Petitioner seeks to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Info City P. S. Case No. 562 of 2024, corresponding to C. T. Case No. 2090 of 2024, pending before the learned J. M. F. C.
-II, Bhubaneswar for alleged commission of Page 1 of 4. offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS on the ground of compromise. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that although the accused-Petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2- Informant are students pursuing engineering course at KIIT University, Bhubaneswar. He further submitted that both of them are staying in the hostel of the college. He also contended that due to a dispute both the persons engaged in a scuffle, which has resulted in registration of the present FIR at the instance of the Informant against the accused-Petitioner. He further submitted that the aforesaid FIR has been registered due to misunderstanding between two students of the same University. In the meantime the dispute has been amicably resolved and both are staying peacefully in the hostel and having a cordial relationship. Accordingly, they have both agreed not to pursue the criminal case.
Hence, the matter has been settled amicably and this petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding. In such view of the matter, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that taking into consideration the age of the Petitioner, which is 22 years, the present proceeding be quashed in the larger interest of justice, otherwise the career of the Petitioner would be in ruins. 5. Learned counsel for the Informant, while supporting the contention of learned counsel for the Petitioner, submitted before this Court that in fact both the Petitioner and the Informant are students of the same University residing in hostel, and that due to a misunderstanding a scuffle took place between the two. As a result of which, the Informant has lodged this FIR. He further submitted Page 2 of 4. that the Informant has not sustained any serious injury. In course of argument, learned counsel for the Informant referring to the affidavit filed before this Court on 13. 10.
2025 contended that the Petitioner had no role in the aforesaid scuffle and his name was included in the FIR due to a misunderstanding. Further, It has been specifically stated in the said affidavit that the Informant does not want to proceed further against the present Petitioner in the present criminal case and that he has no objection in the event the entire criminal proceeding is quashed against the present Petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although the Petitioner and the Informant are students of KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, however, the Petitioner is having several similar antecedents. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that he has received instruction from the IIC of the Infocity Police Station that the matter has been amicably resolved and that the Opposite Party No. 2-Informant does not want to proceed further against the present Petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid subsequent development, learned counsel for the State contended that he will have no objection in the event this Court passes any order to secure the ends of justice. 7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, further taking note of the fact that the Petitioner and the Informant are students aged about 22 years and are prosecuting their engineering studies at KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, further on a careful examination of the nature of allegation and the offences alleged, taking into consideration the submission of Opposite Party Page 3 of 4. No. 2, and the affidavit filed before this Court, this Court found that the matter has been amicably resolved. Such fact is supported by the report of the IIC, Info City Police Station. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that this Court has no reason to doubt that the fact has been amicably resolved.
In view of the aforesaid position, this Court is also of the view that the present case is a fit case where this Court should interfere in exercise of its inherent power. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding against the present Petitioner in Info City P. S. Case No. 562 of 2024, corresponding to C. T. Case No. 2090 of 2024 is quashed. However, it is open to the learned trial Court to proceed against the other accused persons if there are any materials against them. 8. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the CRLMC application stands disposed of. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge S. K. Rout Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 4 of 4. Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 19-Dec-2025 16:59:01
Source: High Court of Orissa. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.