Nalu Sahu vs State Of Odisha & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 14412 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                          WP(CRL) No.143 of 2023

              Nalu Sahu                            ....      Petitioner

                                  Mr. Dipti Ranjan Mohapatra,
                                  Advocate

                                        -versus-

              State of Odisha & others             ....    Opp. Parties

                                  Mr. Arupananda Das
                                  Addl. Govt. Advocate

                                  CORAM:
                             JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
                        JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
                                    ORDER

Order No.                         13.11.2023

   01.           This    matter    is    taken     up   through   Hybrid

arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The writ petition in the nature of habeas corpus has been filed by the petitioner Nalu Sahu with a prayer for direction to the opp. parties to produce his daughter and grandson before this Court.

It is not disputed that the opp. party no.7 is the son-in-law of the petitioner and he has married to the daughter of the petitioner, namely, Pujarani Sahu as per Hindu caste and customs and out of their wedlock, a male child was born. It further appears that there was some matrimonial dispute between the daughter // 2 //

of the petitioner and opp. party no.7 for which the daughter of the petitioner lodged the first information report before the Hinjili police station and accordingly, Hinjili P.S. Case No.54 of 2021 was registered and ultimately, charge sheet has been submitted and the opp. party no.7 and his family members faced trial in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Hinjilicut, Ganjam in G.R. Case No.43 of 2021 (T.R. No.243 of 2023) under sections 498-A/323/294/506/34 of the I.P.C. read with section 4 of the D.P. Act.

During the course of trial, the daughter of the petitioner being examined as P.W.3 stated that due to misunderstanding, she had lodged the F.I.R. and that she was living happily with her husband (opp. party no.7) and her in-laws family and in the cross- examination, she specifically stated that she did not want to proceed further in the case. The learned trial Court vide judgment and order dated 25.07.2023 has been pleased to acquit all the accused persons.

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no challenge has been made to the said judgment.

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was informed by her daughter that she had been confined by the opp. party no.7 and not allowed to meet anyone but we find that the daughter of the petitioner has not been

// 3 //

made a party to the writ petition and there is no clinching material in support of the submission made.

The wife is staying happily and peacefully in the company of her husband (opp. party no.7) along with their child and there is no material before us that she is in wrongful confinement or illegal detention of anyone so as to make out a cause for entertaining this petition for issuance of the writ of habeas corpus.

After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties and going through the documents on record, we do not find any material to issue any kind of direction in this writ petition.

Accordingly, the petition, along with the pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge

sipun

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 14-Nov-2023 11:01:08