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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 3318

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J
Shalini Passi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha – Respondent
CRLMC No.2348 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Luthra, A.N Das
For the Respondents: C.M Singh

The petitioner seeks the quashing of a cognizance order and summons under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, on the grounds that the FIR allegations do not constitute a legal offence.

Headnote:(A) Quashing of Proceedings - Cognizance and Summons - Challenge under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 - Contention that even upon acceptance of FIR allegations, no offence is made out. (Para 3, 4)

Issues: Whether the order taking cognizance and the summons issued by the learned SDJM, Puri should be quashed.

Table of Content
1. application for quashing of cognizance and summons under section 528 of bnss, 2023. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. challenge to criminal proceedings on the basis that fir allegations do not disclose an offence. (Para 4)
3. granting of time to the state to obtain instructions. (Para 5 , 6)
4. granting of interim relief by directing the trial court to adjourn proceedings. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)

ORDER

Order No. 01

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned Senior counsels for the Petitioner perused the CRLMC application as well as the prayer made therein.

3. By filing the present CRLMC application under section 528 of BNSS, 2023, the Accused-Petitioner seeks quashing of order taking cognizance and the summons issued vide order dated 08.06.2021 by the learned SDJM, Puri in G.R Case No.502 of 2021, corresponding to Singhadwara P.S Case No. 12 of 2021.

4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner at the outset contended that even accepting the allegations made in the FIR, no offence is made out under the alleged section. He further submitted that some of the sections added by the Police which are not applicable to the alleged acts in the FIR. Counsel for the State sought for some time to obtain instructions in the matter.

5. Considering such submissions, he is granted four weeks’ time.

6. List this matter in the week commencing 07.09.2026.

I.A. No.1864 of 2026

7. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.

8. Issue notice as above.

9. Accept one set of process fee.

10. As an interim measure, it is directed that on an application being filed by the Petitioners seeking adjournment for further proceeding. In such eventuality, the learned Trial Court shall do well to adjourn the matter for a period of eight weeks.

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