Orissa High Court
Sitakanta Mohapatra And vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 22 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.1611 of 2020
Sitakanta Mohapatra and .... Petitioner(s)
others
Ms. D. Mahapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Party(s)
Ms. S. Moharana, ASC
Ms. P. Naidu, Advocate for O.P.2
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 22.11.2024
10. 1. Heard Ms. Mahapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners,
Ms. Moharana, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State
and Ms. Naidu, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2.
2. In this petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing of the
entire criminal prosecution in connection with Airfield P.S. Case
No.268 of 2017 corresponding to C.T. Case No.3861 of 2017
pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar. The
petitioner No.1 was the husband of the opposite party No.2 whereas
the petitioner Nos.2 & 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of
the opposite party No.2.
3. The allegation against the petitioners are that on
01.09.2017, the informant/opposite party No.2 lodged an F.I.R.
before the Airfield PS alleging therein that on 23.04.2015, she got
married to the petitioner No.1 before the Marriage Office, Cuttack.
After marriage, the petitioner No.1 never brought her to his house
and left her at Bhubaneswar. Finding no other alternative, she had
gone to the house of the petitioners, whereby petitioner No.3 being
the mother-in-law scolded her and the petitioner No.2 being the
father-in-law had demanded Rs.8,00,000/- and not permitted to
enter into their house. It is alleged that the petitioner No.1 also
threatened her that if she will not give the money, he will post some
naked photographs of her in the website. Hence, the F.I.R.
4. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed in the
present case. On 08.11.2017 in Civil Proceeding No.589 of 2017,
the petitioner No.1 and the opposite party No.2 filed a joint petition
under Section 28 of the Special Marriage Act seeking dissolution of
their marriage on mutual consent. In the said proceeding, the
opposite party No.2 filed an affidavit dated 13.12.2018 and the
same was treated as the examination-in-chief and the opposite party
No.2 was subjected to cross-examination. The opposite party No.2
in her cross-examination has inter alia stated as under:-
<The petitioner No.2 Sitakanta Mohapatra is my
husband. Our marriage was held on 23.04.2015
according to terms and conditions of the Special
Marriage Act, 1954. We have filed the original
marriage certificate vide No.65 of 2015 dated
23.04.2015 before this court. We have no issue.
Due to dissensions between us, I am staying
separate from my husband and we have no marital
relationship since 23.04.2015 i.e. from the date of
our marriage. There is absolutely no chance of
reunion between us. We are not able to live
together. There is no collusion between us in the
matter of filling of application under Section 28 of
Special Marriage Act, 1954. I have not been
forced, compelled or influenced in any manner to
file the application for divorce on mutual consent.
On our mutual agreement in respect of permanent
alimony a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh)
was settled today, I have received the amount of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in shape of
Demand Draft No.574339 dated 11.12.2018 drawn
on SBI Khordha Branch towards my permanent
alimony/maintenance and I will have no further
claim regarding permanent alimony from my
husband in future.=
5. Similarly, the petitioner No.1 has also filed an affidavit
reiterating the same stand as of the opposite party No.2. Relying
upon the said affidavit and the pleadings, the learned Judge, Family
Court, Cuttack vide its order dated 14.12.2018 allowed the Civil
Proceeding No.589 of 2017 and dissolved the marriage between the
petitioner No.1 and the opposite party No.2.
6. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the
petitioners. Even, in the charge-sheet, the Investigating Officer has
taken note of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute. It is
also noted in the charge-sheet that the informant/opposite party
No.2 is not willing to continue the prosecution against the
petitioners. Despite that, the police proceeded to file the charge-
sheet against the petitioner No.1 for the alleged commission of the
offences under Sections 498-A/323/509/506/34 of I.P.C. Hence, the
petitioners are seeking quashing of the entire criminal prosecution
initiated against them by the opposite party No.2.
7. Ms. Naidu, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2
submitted that it is fact that the parties have settled their dispute and
the marriage has already been dissolved between the petitioner No.1
and opposite party No.2 by mutual consent. She has also stated that
the opposite party No2 indeed is not interested to prosecute the
petitioners anymore. However, she submits that the petitioner No.1
is continuously harassing the opposite party No.2. Hence, she
submits that appropriate direction should be issued to the petitioner
No.1 bounding him down not to indulging such activities.
8. I am afraid in the present proceeding; this Court can pass
such order. But, suffice it to say that it is expected that the
petitioner No.1 shall refrain from harassing the opposite party No.2
in any manner whatsoever.
9. Taking into consideration the aforementioned, it is
abundantly clear that subjecting the petitioners to trial would be a
futile exercise. Hence, the petitioners case are covered by the
judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in 2012 (10) SCC
303 and B.S. Joshi & others vs. State of Haryana & another
reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, therefore, the petition deserves
merit.
10. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding in connection with
Airfield P.S. Case No.268 of 2017 corresponding to C.T. Case
No.3861 of 2017 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M.,
Bhubaneswar and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom
qua the petitioners are quashed.
11. With this observation, the CRLMC is disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Location: High Court of Orissa
