IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Chiranjibi Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioners argue lack of evidence. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. opposite party disputes petitioners' claims. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court outlines dispute and necessity for evidence. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. principles governing quashing of proceedings. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. examination of evidence fails to establish culpability. (Para 22 , 24) |
| 7. court quashes proceedings against certain petitioners. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 8. conclusion and disposal of applications. (Para 28) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The abovementioned CRLMC applications arise out of the self- same F.I.R, which relates to the same incident. Therefore, for the sake of brevity, they are taken together for adjudication. The CRLMC Nos.2832 of 2024 and CRLMC No.1017 of 2024 have been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned order of cognizance dated 14.11.2018, at Annexure-3, passed by the Ld. S.D.J.M.(S), Cuttack as well as to quash the entire criminal proceeding against the Petitioners initiated in S.T. Case No.39 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.372 of 2018 now pending before the Court of the Learned SDJM(S), Cuttack. Since both the CRLMC applications relate to the sel
Rajkishore Singh and another v. State of Orissa
Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre
Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra
Kurukshetra University v. State of Haryana
State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy
Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra
Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v. State of Maharashtra
Bandlamuddi Atchuta Ramaiah v. State of A.P.
The court established that proceedings may be quashed where the FIR does not constitute a prima facie case against certain accused, emphasizing the limited evidentiary value of FIRs in criminal trial....
Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be applied cautiously, primarily to prevent abuse of process, and FIRs should not be quashed prematurely when allegations disclose a cognizable offenc....
The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, especially in the context of an ongoing civil dispute, to secure a conviction.
The court emphasized that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be sparingly exercised and that the court should not interfere with the investigation unless no cognizable offence is disclosed. I....
The court ruled that where the allegations lack prima facie merit and are substantiated by credible evidence to the contrary, criminal proceedings can be quashed to prevent abuse of the legal process....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.