Back
2024 Supreme(Ori) 530
THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SIBO SANKAR MISHRA, J.
Anil Kumar Mantri - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Orissa And Another – Respondents
CRLMC No. 2358 of 2024
Decided On : 29-10-2024
For the Petitioner:Mr. P. K. Samantray, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. B. K. Ragada, Additional Government Advocate, Mr. A. K. Raut, Advocate
Quashing of criminal proceedings permissible where continuation would cause injustice, especially in light of amicable resolution and lack of evidence for serious charges.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 354-A - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 10 - Quashing of proceedings - Charges framed against accused under IPC and POCSO - Petitioner sought quashing based on settlement with informant, who stated misunderstanding led to the FIR - Court acknowledged that victim was not subjected to penetrative sexual assault; thereby justifying lesser charges framed - Quashing of proceedings was granted on grounds of settlement, with a mandate for the petitioner to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- for the victim's education. (Paras 1, 5, 8, 9)
(B) Inherent Jurisdiction - Court emphasized the use of its inherent jurisdiction to quash proceedings when continuation would inflict injustice, especially considering the victim's trauma. (Paras 7, 8)
(C) Settlement Effect - Recognition that amicable resolutions in criminal matters can be permissible under certain circumstances, as long as they do not undermine legal ethics and the interest of justice. (Paras 6, 7)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of misconduct against petitioner. (Para 1 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. settlement reached between parties. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. quashing of proceedings justified. (Para 8) |
| 4. petitioner to compensate victim. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT :
S.S. Mishra, J.
1. The petitioner by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. is seeking quashing of the order dated 25.04.2024 passed by the learned Adhoc Additional District and Sessions Judge (F.T.S.C), Keonjhar in Special Case No.06 of 2024, whereby the learned Court below has framed the charges for the offences punishable under Section 354 -A of the I.P.C. read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act against the accused- petitioner.
2. The matter was taken up by this Court on 23.08.2024 and the following order was passed:-
"This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
2. Mr. Ajit Kumar Raut, learned counsel enters appearance on behalf of the informant/opposite party no.2 by filing Vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
4. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Keonjhar Sadar P.S. Case No.66 of 2024 registered under Section 376 (1) of the IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act corresponding to Special Case No.6 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Ad hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTSC), Keonjhar.
5. The prosecution case is that the petitioner was working as Headmaster in Narasinghpur Primary School in which, the victim was studying. On 08.01.2024, the petitioner asked the victim to come to his office room and when she came, the petitioner touched and kissed her private part. The petitioner/accused had forced the victim to keep physical relationship with him and further told the victim not to disclose the same. On the basis of such allegation, the F.I.R. was lodged.
6. In this case, after investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and subsequent thereto, charges have been framed against the petitioner. At this stage, the petitioner has entered into a settlement with opposite party no.2. Therefore, on the ground of settlement, the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court to quash the entire proceeding. ,
7. The petitioner and opposite party no.2 are present in Court today through their respective counsel. They have filed their self attested photocopies of their Aadhar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record. They have also filed a joint affidavit dated 23.08.2024, inter alia, stating that due to misunderstanding, the F.I.R. came to be registered against the petitioner and now to maintain the peace and tranquility, on the intervention of the family members and well wishers of both the parties, they have arrived at a settlement. Therefore, the opposite party no.2 is not willing to prosecute the petitioner any more. The affidavit is taken on record.
8. Mr. Ragada, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that he does not have the case diary to assist this Court. Hence, he seeks for an adjournment to obtain the same.
9. List this matter on 3rd of September, 2024. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall obtain the case diary.
10. In view of the peculiarity of the present case, the further proceeding in Special Case No.6 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Ad hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTSC), Keonjhar shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing."
3. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner as well as the opposite party No.2 along with the victim girl are present in Court today and they are being represented by their respective counsels. They have also filed their self attested copies of their Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity.
4. The matter was taken up in camera. This Court separately interacted with the victim girl, her mother and the father of the victim girl. The victim girl inter alia sta
