Orissa High Court
Manaswini Behera And Others vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 4 April, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.1308 of 2025
Manaswini Behera and others .... Petitioner(s)
Ms. S. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Party(s)
Ms. S. Moharana, ASC
Mr. B. R. Mohanty, Advocate for O.P.2
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 04.04.2025
02. 1. Heard.
2. At the instance of the petitioner No.1 namely Manaswini
Behera, the F.I.R. dated 26.12.2022 in Badambadi P.S. Case
No.414 of 2022 came to be registered against the opposite party
No.2 for the alleged commission of the offences under Sections
498-A/323/294/506 of I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act.
The accused persons in said case had approached this Court by
filing CRLMC No.1169 of 2025. This Court vide a detailed order
dated 27.03.2025 quashed the F.I.R. and the consequential
proceedings.
3. The present case is a counter case being lodged by the in-
law of the petitioner No.1. At the instance of the opposite party
No.2 namely Ketakilata Sahoo, the F.I.R. dated 01.02.2023 in
Badambadi P.S. Case No.40 of 2023 came to be registered against
the petitioners for the alleged commission of offences under
Sections 294/323/379/506/34 of I.P.C. On the ground of settlement,
the petitioners are seeking quashing of the F.I.R and consequential
proceedings. The petitioner No.1 is the daughter-in-law of the
opposite party No.2 whereas the petitioner Nos.2, 3 & 4 are the
father, mother and sister of the petitioner No.1.
4. The prosecution case in brief is that on 01.02.2023, the
informant/opposite party No.2 lodged a written report before the
Badambadi P.S. alleging therein that the marriage of her son
namely Subhrajyoti Sahoo was fixed with the petitioner No.1
through Oriya Matrimony and they got married on 07.07.2020. It is
alleged that from the day of Asta Mangala, the petitioner No.1
behaved in an erratic manner. The informant and other family
members tried to change her behavior but to no avail. It is further
alleged by the informant that the petitioner No.1 was never
interested in leading a conjugal life with her son. After passing of
days, she became violent and started physically abusing the
complainant, her son and daughter. It is also alleged that when the
matter was intimated to the petitioner No.2, the father of the
petitioner No.1, instead of pacifying, he provoked petitioner No.1 to
beat the complainant and her son and daughter and threatened them
with dire consequences. Hence, the F.I.R.
5. The petitioner No.1 and the opposite party No.2 are
present in the Court whereas the petitioner Nos.2, 3 & 4 are present
through Virtual Mode and they are being represented and identified
by their counsels. They have also filed self-attested copy of their
Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record.
6. The opposite party No.2 has filed an affidavit dated
04.04.2025 inter alia stating as under:-
"5. I am the informant in Badambadi P.S. case no.40
of 2023 corresponding GR case no 89 of 2012 which
has been submitted in the J.M.F.C. (City). The
petitioners have preferred the above Criminal Misc.
Case with a prayer to quash the Criminal
Proceedings.
6. That due to family misunderstanding I have lodge
F.I.R. against my Daughter-in-law and other family
members and in the mean time dispute between us
have already compromised/settle amicably.
7. That as the dispute has already compromise
between us for which I no longer intend to proceed
with the case and the aforesaid Criminal Proceedings
may kindly be quashed.
8. That the facts stated are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief of the deponent."
7. On query from the Court, the opposite party No.2, who is
present in Court submits that because of misunderstanding, the case
and counter case was filed against each other and now they have
settled the dispute and the petitioner No.1 is residing in her house.
The matrimonial dispute between her son and the petitioner No.1
has already been settled. Therefore, there is no grievance left either
against her daughter-in-law or her family members. Hence, she
does not want to prosecute the matter with the petitioners.
8. Ms. Moharana, learned Additional Standing Counsel for
the State submits that essentially the dispute is arising out of a
matrimonial discord and the parties have settled their dispute and
the opposite party No.2 filed an affidavit to that effect, this Court
may give indulgence in the present matter as there is no legal
impediment.
9. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have settled
their dispute and keeping in view the judgment 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, I am of
the considered view that subjecting the petitioner to the rigors of the
trial would be a futile exercise. Therefore, the petition deserves
merit.
10. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding in connection with
1.C.C. Case No.17 of 2023 and G.R. Case No.89 of 2023 arising
out of Badambadi P.S. Case No.40 of 2023 pending in the Court of
the learned J.M.F.C. (City), Cuttack and the consequential
proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed.
11. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 07-Apr-2025 11:54:33
