Orissa High Court
Santosh Kumar Nanda vs Asha Kumari & Anr. …. Opp. Party (S) on 20 May, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 21-May-2026 17:24:15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.1273 of 2026
Along with
CRLMC Nos.581, 594, 791 and 827 of 2026
Santosh Kumar Nanda .... Petitioner (s)
(In CRLMC No.1273 of 2026)
Prasanna Nanda @ Prasanna
Kumar Nanda
(In CRLMC No.581 of 2026)
Prassana Nanda @ Prasanna
Kumar Nanda & Ors.
(In CRLMC No.594 of 2026)
Santosh Nanda @ Santosh Kumar
Nanda
(In CRLMC Nos.791 & 827 of 2026)
Mr. Anantanarayan Pattanaik, Adv.
-versus-
Asha Kumari & Anr. .... Opp. Party (s)
(In CRLMC No.1273 of 2026)
Asha Kumari
(In CRLMC Nos.581 & 827 of 2026)
State of Odisha & Another
(In CRLMC Nos.594 of 791 of 2026)
Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC
Mr. Amit Prasad Bose, Adv.
(for private O.P. No.1)
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order No. ORDER
03. 20.05.2026
1.
These matters are taken up in Chamber at 4.30 P.M. for amicable
settlement of the dispute between the parties.
Page 1 of 7
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 21-May-2026 17:24:15
2. Pursuant to the order dated 11.05.2026 passed in CRLMC No.1273
of 2026, the Petitioner (Santosh Kumar Nanda)/ husband and the
Opposite Party No.1 (Asha Kumari)/ wife are present.
3. Since all the above-mentioned CRLMCs arise out of the
proceedings initiated by the same complainant named Asha
Kumari against the Petitioner(s) in all the CRLMCs, the same are
heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
4. (i) The Petitioner, in CRLMC No.1273 of 2026, has made a prayer
to quash the entire proceeding in connection with CRP No.281 of
2026 filed under Section 144 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 125
of the Cr.P.C., 1973 pending in the court of the learned Judge,
Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar. (ii) The Petitioners, in CRLMC
No.581 of 2026 and CRLMC No.827 of 2026, have made a prayer to
quash the proceeding initiated against them by the Opposite Party
(Asha Kumari) under the protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005 vide CMC No.1811 of 2025 pending in the court
of the learned J.M.F.C.(O), Bhubaneswar. (iii) The Petitioners, in
CRLMC No.594 of 2026 and CRLMC No.791 of 2026, have made a
prayer to quash the F.I.R. and the entire Criminal Proceeding
initiated by the Opposite Party No.2 (Asha Kumari) in connection
with Pahala P.S. Case No.354 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case
No.2034 of 2025 pending in the court of the learned J.M.F.C. (O),
Bhubaneswar.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the Parties.
Page 2 of 7
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 21-May-2026 17:24:15
6. This Court also interacted with the Petitioner (Santosh Kumar
Nanda)/ husband (hereinafter referred to as “the Petitioner/
husband” for brevity) and the Opposite Party No.1 (Asha
Kumari)/ wife (hereinafter referred to as “the Opposite Party/
wife” for brevity) in person.
7. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the dispute
between the parties arises out of a matrimonial discord between
the Petitioner/ husband and Opposite Party/ wife. During the
pendency of the above-mentioned cases, the parties have amicably
settled their disputes with the intervention of this Court.
Accordingly, the Petitioner/ husband and Opposite Party/ wife
have resumed their conjugal life and are presently residing
together peacefully. The parties have voluntarily resolved all
matrimonial disputes, including the criminal cases pending
against each other.
8. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further contends that, in the
meantime, good sense has prevailed and both the Petitioner/
husband and the Opposite Party/ wife, along with their respective
family members, have reconciled their differences and are now
living in peace. As such, the Opposite Party/ wife does not want to
proceed with the above-mentioned cases any further.
9. Learned counsel for Opposite Party/ wife, on the other hand,
confirms the factum of settlement and submits that the Opposite
Party/ wife does not intend to proceed further with the above-
mentioned cases.
Page 3 of 7
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 21-May-2026 17:24:15
10.On perusal of the case record, it appears that the Petitioner/
husband and the Opposite Party/wife have filed joint affidavits
dated 20.05.2026 in CRLMC Nos.827, 791 and 1273 of 2026
respectively. The relevant portion of the said affidavits reads as
under:
“5. That, after intervention of this Hon’ble Court, the
petitioner and Opposite Party are trying to resolve their
dispute and in this regard the petitioner went to Andilo,
Bhubaneswar from his place of service Chandikhole,
where the Opp. Party and the minor child were residing
and the petitioner stayed therein with them from
04.04.2026 to 06.04.2026. Thereafter, the petitioner’s
place of service is transferred from Chandikhole to Jajpur
Road and even after his transfer, the petitioner also went
to Andilo, Bhubaneswar and resided with his wife and
minor child therein from 13.04.2026 to 15.04.2026,
subsequently also stayed therein from 18.04.2026 to
20.04.2026 and 24.04.2026 to 26.04.2026. It is also
submitted that the present Opposite Party (wife) also
came to the service place of the petitioner at Jajpur Road
and is residing with the petitioner since 26.04.2026 and
continued till yet without any dispute between the
parties.
6. That, it is humbly stated that after intervention of this
Hon’ble Court, the present petitioner (Husband) and
Opp. Party (wife) including the minor child are residing
together comfortably and without any further dispute
and maintaining their marital life in smooth and
peaceful manner.
7. That, though the present parties are residing together
as husband and wife in a peaceful manner with utmost
happiness and without any further dispute, therefore the
issues have already been amicably settled between bothPage 4 of 7
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 21-May-2026 17:24:15the parties for which both the parties does not want to
proceed further in the proceedings pending before the
concerned court below and if the present proceedings
pending before the Court of learned Judge, Family
Court-II, Bhubaneswar and learned J.M.F.C. (O),
Bhubaneswar are quashed against the present petitioner,
then the present Opp. Party has no objection to the
same.”
11.Learned counsel for the State has no objection if the aforesaid
proceedings are quashed in view of the settlement between the
Petitioner/ husband and the Opposite Party/ wife.
12.Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned
counsel for the parties, the contents of the joint affidavits brought
on record and the nature of the dispute, this Court is satisfied that
the parties have voluntarily resolved their disputes amicably.
13.It is well settled that in cases arising out of matrimonial disputes,
where the parties have settled their differences amicably, the High
Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, may quash the criminal proceedings
to secure the ends of justice.
14. The Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab1,
held that criminal proceedings involving offences of a personal
nature can be quashed where the parties have settled the matter
amicably.
1
(2012) 10 SCC 303
Page 5 of 7
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 21-May-2026 17:24:15
15. Further in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab &
Anr.2, the Supreme Court laid down guidelines for quashing
proceedings on the basis of compromise and observed that such
power should be exercised where the dispute is essentially private
and continuation of proceedings would be futile.
16. Similarly, in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors.3,
the Supreme Court reiterated that in cases having overwhelmingly
civil or personal flavour, the High Court may quash proceedings if
the parties have settled the dispute, provided the offences are not
heinous or serious in nature affecting society at large.
17. In the present case, considering the nature of the dispute and the
fact that the parties have amicably settled their differences and are
living peacefully, continuation of the criminal proceeding would
be an exercise in futility and would not serve any useful purpose.
18. Accordingly, in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 528
of BNSS (erstwhile Section of the 482 Cr.P.C.), this Court deems it
fit and proper to quash the criminal proceeding initiated against
the Petitioner (s) in connection with CRP No.281 of 2026 pending
in the court of the learned Judge, Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar;
CMC No.1811 of 2025 pending in the court of the learned
J.M.F.C.(O), Bhubaneswar and Pahala P.S. Case No.354 of 2025
corresponding to G.R. Case No.2034 of 2025 pending in the court
of the learned J.M.F.C. (O), Bhubaneswar.
2
(2014) 6 SCC 466
3
(2019) 5 SCC 688
Page 6 of 7
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 21-May-2026 17:24:15
19. Accordingly, all the above-mentioned CRLMCs stand allowed
and disposed of.
20. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
21. Personal appearance of the Petitioner (Santosh Kumar Nanda)
and the Opposite Party No.1 (Asha Kumari) is dispensed with.
22. A copy of this order be communicated to the respective learned
trial Courts for information.
( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
B.Jhankar
Page 7 of 7
