Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Sangita Swain – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. quashing of fir based on subsequent settlement. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments against the legitimacy of criminal charges. (Para 4) |
| 3. opposite parties' claims regarding misappropriation. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's view on exercising jurisdiction under section 482 crpc. (Para 7 , 10) |
| 5. conditions for exercising inherent jurisdiction. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 6. court's dismissal of the petition to quash fir. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.
1. The petitioners, by way of the present petition, seek quashing of the FIR and the consequential criminal proceedings in respect of Angul P.S. Case No. 305 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No.825 of 2021, pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Angul, inter alia, on the ground of subsequent settlement and restitution of the compensation amount.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
i. The prosecution case, as reflected in the FIR, is that on 13.06.2021 the complainant, Shri R.S. Rawat, Chief Administrative Officer, Air Force, Kalaikunda, Midnapore (West), West Bengal, lodged an FIR against Mrs. Sangita Swain, Secretary of an NGO namely “Human Rights Watch”, Angul.
ii. The FIR alleges that
The court reaffirmed that subsequent restitution does not negate criminal liability where allegations disclose elements of misappropriation under IPC.
Subsequent restitution of compensation does not negate criminal liability; FIR allegations support continuation of criminal proceedings under IPC for misappropriation despite civil suit settlement.
Subsequent restitution of funds does not negate criminal liability if the FIR establishes prima facie misappropriation, and inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC is exercised sparingly to prev....
The power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings under Sec. 482 of CrPC should be sparingly and cautiously exercised, and should not be used for heinous and serious offences. The timing of s....
The power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the of....
The court emphasized the need for verification of compromises in cases under the SC/ST Act to prevent misuse and uphold the integrity of the law.
The court emphasized that inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings should be exercised sparingly, particularly in serious offences, to prevent abuse of process and ensure justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
