Orissa High Court
Himansu Sekhar Das vs State Of Odisha & Another .... Opp. ... on 20 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4173 of 2024
Himansu Sekhar Das .... Petitioner
Mr. Debashis
Nanda,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opp. Parties
Mr.Tej Kumar,
ASC and Ms.
Sudhamayee
Das, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order ORDER
No. 20.11.2024
01.
1.
Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the
F.I.R. in connection with Jatni P.S. Case No.372 of
2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No.394 of 2020 came
to be registered against the petitioner for the alleged
commission of offences punishable under Sections
294/341/323/324/ 325/307/354/506/34 of the IPC
pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)-
cum-J.M.F.C., Jatni.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that, the
marriage between the informant and the present
petitioner was solemnized on 11.07.2018 in presence
of the family members and relatives. After few days of
their marriage, there was misunderstanding between
the parties. In absence of the petitioner, the wife left
the in-laws house and filed a proceeding under Section
125 of the Cr. P.C. in the Court of the learned Judge,
Family Court, Puri. Hence, the case.
4. The dispute is arising out of a matrimonial
discord. Due to the misunderstanding between the
parties, they had filed a petition under Section 13-B of
the Hindu Marriage Act before the Court of the learned
Judge, Family Court, Puri for dissolution of their
marriage on mutual consent.
5. When the matter stood thus, at that point of time,
the parties have settled their dispute and they decided
to resume their conjugal life.
6. The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 are
present in the Court today through Video Conferencing
mode. They are being represented through their
respective counsel, who identified them. They have
filed the photocopies of their self-attested Aadhaar
Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on
record.
7. On query from the Court, the opposite party No.2,
who is appearing before this Court through V.C. mode,
reiterated her stand and stated that, they have revived
their conjugal life and she is living happily with the
present petitioner. Hence, she does not want to
proceed anymore against the present petitioner.
8. Mr. Kumar, learned Additional Standing Counsel
appearing for the State submits that essentially this
matter is arising out of a matrimonial discord. Since
the parties have settled their dispute and they have
jointly made the settlement before the learned Judge,
Family Court, Puri and the petition under Section 13-
B of the Hindu Marriage Act has been dropped
pursuant to the settlement terms, there is no legal
impediment in quashing the present case.
9. The petitioner has appeared in person and
undertakes before this Court that he will comply with
the terms of the settlement and he will not indulge in
any similar conduct in future. The undertaking given
by the petitioner is taken on record. On the basis of
the aforementioned, I am inclined to allow the present
petition.
10. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have
settled their dispute and they have revived their
conjugal life. Both the petitioner and the opposite
party No.2 appearing before this Court, made
categorical statement that, they will continue their
conjugal obligations, I am inclined to allow the present
petition. Hence, subjecting the petitioner to trial would
be a futile exercise. The facts of the present case is
squarely covered by the judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh v. State of
Punjab and another, reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303;
B.S. Joshi & others v. State of Haryana &
another, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 and
MadhavraoJi Wajirao Scindia & another v.
Sambhajirao ChandrojiraoAngre and others,
reported in AIR 1988 SC 709, therefore, the petition
deserves merit.
11. Taking into consideration the aforementioned
judgments, the facts of the case and submissions
made at the bar, the F.I.R. in connection with Jatni
P.S. Case No.372 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case
No.394 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Civil
Judge (J.D.)-cum-J.M.F.C., Jatni and the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the
petitioner is quashed.
12. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Subhasis
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 22-Nov-2024 18:03:26
