Orissa High Court
Sanjay Kumar Tarai vs State Of Odisha And Another on 2 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No. 3887 of 2022
Sanjay Kumar Tarai .... Petitioner
Mr. Satya Narayan Mishra 4
-Versus-
State of Odisha and Another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. Sitikanta Mishra, ASC, OP No.1
Mr. Rajiv Kumar Mahanta, Advocate for OP No.2
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
02.01.2023
Order No.
01. 1. Mr. Rajiv Kumar Mahanta, learned counsel has entered
appearance for opposite party No.2 and files his Vakalatnama in the
Court today, which is taken on record.
2. The name of Mr.Mahanta, learned counsel for the opposite
party No.2 be reflected in the brief as well as in the cause list.
3. Heard Mr. Satya Narayan Mishra 4, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr.Sitikanta Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel
for the State and Mr. Rajiv Kumar Mahanta, learned counsel for
opposite party No.2.
4. Instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the
petitioner for quashing of the criminal proceeding in connection
with Chudamani Marine P.S. Case No.26 of 2018 corresponding to
G.R. Case No.256 of 2018 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C.
Basudevpur on the ground of compromise and settlement reached
at between the petitioner and opposite party No.2, who are
spouses.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner and opposite party No.2
submit that the matter is settled and both the parties are staying
together and leading a happy conjugal life and therefore, the
criminal proceeding pending before the learned court below should
be brought to an end in exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this
Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and while claiming so, an affidavit
sworn by opposite party No.2 is referred to.
6. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the State submits that
necessary order may be passed considering the contentions of the
parties.
7. The petitioner and opposite party No.2 are physically
present in Court today. On being asked, opposite party No.2-wife
submits that the matter has been compromised between the parties
and presently she is staying with the petitioner and leading a happy
married life. The petitioner and opposite party No.2 have produced
their original Aadhar cards for perusal of this Court.
8. A copy of the FIR as at Annexure-1 is also perused by this
Court vide Chudamani Marine P.S. Case No.26 of 2018 which has
been registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 307 & 506 IPC besides
Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
9. Considering the affidavit as at Annexure-2 and the
admission of opposite party No.2 and in view of the fact that
compromise between the parties has been reached at, the Court is
of the view that in exercise of inherent power under Section 482
Cr.P.C., the proceeding should be quashed. In other words, having
regard to the settlement reached at between the petitioner and
opposite party No.2, who are settled in life after differences being
sorted out, no useful purpose would be served to keep the criminal
proceeding alive and therefore, it should be quashed in the interest
of justice. The Court is aware of the decision of the Apex Court in
the case of B.S. Joshi and others Vrs. State of Haryana & Another
reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, wherein, it has been held that
inherent jurisdiction may be exercised taking into account the facts
and circumstances particular case and in the present case, the
proceeding should be brought to an end mainly to ensure peace and
stability in the marital life of the petitioner and opposite party
No.2.
10. Accordingly, it is ordered.
11. In the result, the CRLMC stands allowed.
12. Consequently, the criminal proceeding in connection with
Chudamani Marine P.S. Case No.26 of 2018 corresponding to G.R.
Case No.256 of 2018 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C.
Basudevpur is hereby quashed.
13. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
U.K.Sahoo
order of cognizance under Annexure-1 and the entire criminal proceeding in G.R. Case
No.11 of 2014 arising out of Charmal P.S. Case No.07 of 2014
pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Rairakhol on the grounds
stated therein.
3. Perused the copy of the order of cognizance dated 8th
September, 2014 under Annexure-1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that two other
co-accused persons faced trial in S.T. Case No.32 of 2022 and they
have been acquitted of all charges vide judgment dated 4th
November, 2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Rairakhol and considering the same and the fact that the evidence
of the prosecution was entirely hostile since the parties have had the
compromise and settlement, the proceeding as against the petitioner
should be quashed as no fruitful purpose would be served to
continue the same. It is submitted that in exercise of inherent
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the criminal proceeding vis-a-
vis the petitioner should be quashed as it would be abuse of the
process of law and on the background of other co-accused persons
have been acquitted on the strength of hostile evidence.
5. Mr. Mishra, learned ASC on the other hand submits that
there has been multiple injuries received by the informant during the
alleged incident which is perused from the record. Therefore
notwithstanding the order of acquittal under Annexure-5 as against
hearing of accused on such grounds petitioners should not be
exempted from facing the trial.
6. The Court perused the copy of the judgment as at
Annexure-5 series and finds that all the material witnesses have been
turned hostile since there is a comprise between the parties. No
doubt, some of the informants received injuries during and in course
of the alleged offence but then none of the prosecution witnesses
deposed anything adverse against the co-accused persons, who
faced trial and finally acquitted of all charges. With such evidence
on record and more fully the matter is settled between the parties,
there is a remote possibility to find out other incriminating materials
against the petitioners who are subjected to trial. In other words,
the court finds that the abuse of the process of the Court to
reproduced the evidence which is entirely hostile as would reveal
from Annexure-5 series whereupon learned sessions court acquitted
the co-accused persons for the similar charges and having regard to
the acquittal judgment under Annuexre-5 series, the Court is of the
view that the criminal proceeding which is pending against the
petitioners should be brought to an end as no fruitful purpose
would be served to continue the same.
7. Accordingly, it is ordered.
8. Consequently, the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.11
of 2014 arising out of Charmal P.S. Case No.07 of 2014 pending in
the court of learned S.D.J.M., Rairakhol quashed vis-à-vis the
petitioners.
9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
U.K.Sahoo
