SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ori) 735

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI, J.
Kanchanbala Sahoo - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Odisha And Anr. – Respondents 
CRLMC No. 4244 of 2024
Decided On : 13-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Bipin Kumar Nayak, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Amitav Pradhan, Asc, Miss Gayatri Patra, Asc, Mr. Trilochan Panigrahi, Adv.

Departmental exoneration does not automatically quash criminal charges, which must be proven independently in a trial.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 284 and 337 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - The petitioner sought to quash criminal proceedings pending against her in G.R. Case No. 2114 of 2013. Allegations arose from a patient suffering adverse effects from saline administered, leading to charges of negligence. The petitioner was exonerated in a departmental proceeding, yet the criminal case remained, causing deprivation of pension benefits. The court emphasized that the scope of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to prevent abuse of process and uphold justice. The court ruled that the case involves disputed facts, necessitating trial. (Paras 8, 13, 15)

Findings of Court:
No grounds for quashing were found; allegations constituted a prima facie case warranting trial. (Paras 16, 18)

Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed based on exoneration in departmental proceedings and the sufficiency of the charges.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that departmental and criminal proceedings are distinct in nature and an exoneration does not automatically quash criminal charges. Therefore, the warrant for a trial remains valid and necessary.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks to quash criminal proceedings. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner's contention of false implication. (Para 3)
3. arguments opposing the petitioner's claims. (Para 4)
4. court's reasoning on inherent jurisdiction. (Para 5 , 6)
5. circumstances for exercising section 482 cr.p.c. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
6. investigation and charge sheet admission verified. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
7. departmental exoneration does not affect criminal case. (Para 13 , 14)
8. need for adjudication of allegations at trial. (Para 15 , 16)
9. court dismisses the petition, allowing proceedings to continue. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. The petitioner in the present petition seeks to quash the criminal proceeding pending before the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Puri in G.R. Case No.2114 of 2013 corresponding to Kumbharapada P.S. Case No. 357 of 2013 registered under Sections 284 and 337 of the I.P.C.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

i. The petitioner and another have been implicated as accused in Kumbharapada P.S. Case No. 357 of 2013, registered under Sections 284 and 337 of the I.P.C., which ultimately gave rise to G.R. Case No. 2114 of 2013, now pending before the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Puri.

ii. The prosecution case is that on 19.10.2013 at about 11:00 P.M., the informant (O.P. No. 2) went to the District Head Quarter Hospital, Puri for treatment as he was experiencing pain in his abdomen. He was admitted as an indoor patient and was administered two saline bottles. However, when the third saline was administered by the nurse, i.e., the present petitioner, after about 15–20 minutes, his body allegedly started vibrating and irritation was felt in his hands, feet and palms. He also could not see anything and his muscles became stiff. On examination, the doctor allegedly stated that the saline contained some white particles which caused the reaction. It is further alleged that the concerned nurse was found absent thereafter. The informant was then given oxygen and referred to another hospital.

iii. In the meantime, investigation has been completed and the I.O. has submitted charge sheet/final form against the petitioner and another for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 284, 337 and 34 of the I.P.C.

iv. For the alleged occurrence, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 25.10.2013 and was subsequently reinstated into service vide order dated 28.12.2013, pending finalization of the departmental proceeding.

v. Thereafter, the petitioner retired from service from the post of Nursing Sister on 31.12.2013 on attaining the age of superannuation.

vi. Subsequently, in the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner, the charges were not established and, as such, the petitioner was exonerated from the charges levelled against her. The period of suspension was also treated as duty.

vii. The informant had also filed a case bearing C.C. Case No. 329 of 2013 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Puri, which was subsequently dismissed for non-prosecution.

viii. It is further stated that although the petitioner was exonerated in the disciplinary proceeding and the case filed by the informant before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Puri was dismissed for non-prosecution, she has allegedly been deprived of receiving her pensionary benefits due to the pendency of the present criminal case, which has been pending since the year 2013.

ix. Being aggrieved by the continuance of the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No. 2114 of 2013 pending before the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Puri, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition.

II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner made the following submissions in support of his contentions:

i. The petitioner contended that she is not involved in the alleged occurrence and has been falsely implicat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top