Orissa High Court
Santosh Kumar Kanhar vs State Of Odisha & Another .... Opp. ... on 10 April, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.2370 of 2024
Santosh Kumar Kanhar .... Petitioner
Mr. Anirudha
Das, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opp. Parties
Mr.S.J.Mohanty,
ASC & Mr.
Khageswar
Behera,
Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order ORDER
No. 10.04.2025
08.
1.
Heard.
2. At the instance of the father of the opposite party
No.2, the F.I.R. in connection with Banigochha P.S.
Case No.17 of 2015 corresponding to T.R. Case No.22
of 2016 came to be registered against the petitioner on
09.07.2015 for the alleged commission of offences
punishable under Sections 363/376/506 of the IPC
r/w Section 6 of the POCSO Act, pending in the Court
of learned Special Judge, Nayagarh.
3. On 26.02.2015, when the informant had been to
his house, he found his daughter was not at home.
Immediately he searched his daughter everywhere.
Hence, filed the F.I.R.
4. The charge sheet has been filed on 02.07.2016 for
the alleged commission of the offences punishable
under Sections 363/376/506 of the IPC r/w Section 6
of the POCSO Act against the petitioner.
5. The charges have not been framed as yet in the
case. At this stage, the parties have settled their
dispute. On the basis of the settlement terms, the
present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the
F.I.R.
6. The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 as well
as the father of the opposite party No.2 are present in
the Court today. They are being represented by their
respective counsel and identified by them. They have
also filed the photocopies of their respective Aadhaar
Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on
record.
7. The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 have
married on 28.02.2015 at village temple of TAnganadi
(Jamusahi), District- Nayagarh in presence of the
villagers and well-wishers. They have also been
blessed with a male child on 28.01.2016. Now they are
happy with their married life.
8. The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 have
filed a joint affidavit before this Court dated
10.04.2025, inter alia, stating as under:
"1. That on the basis of the informant lodged by the
informant Baidhar Jain (father of the present opposite
party No.2) a case U/s. 363/366/366(A)/506/34 of
I.P.C. was registered against the present petitioner by
the I.I.C., Banigochha Police Station.
2. That the father of the opp. party No.2 has somehow
or other initiated the aforesaid case against the
petitioner, but now we are living as husband and wife
and we have been blessed with children and
maintaining our happy conjugal life with our children
and we do not want to proceed with the case and the
Opp. Party No.2 who is the wife of the petitioner do
not want to prosecute any further against the
petitioner as he is the husband of the Opp. party
No.2, but some how or other a malicious proceeding
has been initiated by the father of the Opp. party
No.2.
3. That the petitioner and Opp. party No.2 got
married on dated 28.2.2015 before village temple of
Tanganadi (Jamusahi), P.S.- Banigochha, Dist.-
Nayagarh, in presence of villagers and they were
blessed with a male child on dated 28.01.2016
namely Yash Kanhar and now they were maintaining
their happy conjugal life.
4. That while the marital life is going on smoothly, for
which the prosecution launched by the father of the
Opp. Party No.2 may kindly be quashed so that both
the petitioner and the Opp. Party No.2 can live
happily, for which considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, this Joint Affidavit is being filed for
kind appreciation by this Hon'ble Court."
9. Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel
appearing for the opposite party No.1-State submits
that the petitioner has married to the opposite party
No.2 and they have been blessed with a child. They are
leading happy conjugal life. They have also filed an
affidavit before this Court in that regard. Therefore,
there is no legal impediment in quashing the present
F.I.R.
10. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have
settled their dispute and they have also filed the
affidavit to that regard, I am inclined to allow the
present petition. In the fact scenario of the present
case, subjecting the petitioner to the rigors of trial is
destined to be a futile exercise. 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
Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia & another v.
Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre 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
Banigochha P.S. Case No.17 of 2015 corresponding to
T.R. Case No.22 of 2016 pending in the Court of
learned Special Judge, Nayagarh and the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the
petitioner are quashed.
12. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
Digitally Signed Judge
Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Subhasis
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 11-Apr-2025 18:55:29
