Tofaza Khatun @ Tofeja Khatun vs Nurul Hoda ..... Opposite Party
2025 Latest Caselaw 10936 Ori

Orissa High Court

Tofaza Khatun @ Tofeja Khatun vs Nurul Hoda ..... Opposite Party on 2 December, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                              CRLLP No.101 of 2008

            Tofaza Khatun @ Tofeja Khatun          .....                 Petitioner
                                                           Represented By Adv. -
                                                           Mr. D.R. Mohapatra

                                          -versus-
            Nurul Hoda                            .....            Opposite Party
                                                           Represented By Adv. -
                                                           M/s. P.K. Das, D. Dash

                                 CORAM:
            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

                                          ORDER

02.12.2025 Order No.

08. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. None appears for the Petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the Opposite Party.

3. The present leave application has been filed at the instance of the complainant challenging the judgment dated 14.08.2008 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur in I.C.C. Case No.379/97, which corresponds to Trial No.1345/97.

4. Initially the Petitioner as Complainant filed a complaint case alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act. Such complaint was filed in the year 1997. Thereafter, the parties faced the trial and the trial court, vide judgment dated 14.08.2008, after taking into consideration the evidence of both sides and on a

thorough analysis, has arrived at a conclusion that the complainant has miserably failed to lead clear, cogent and trustworthy evidence regarding the demand of dowry and physical torture by the Accused-Opposite Party. Since the complainant was failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt, accused persons were found not guilty. Hence, they were acquitted of all charges under Section under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C.

5. Perused the impugned judgment dated 14.08.2008 as well as the materials on record. On analysis of the evidence on record, this Court is of the view that the trial court has not committed any illegality in acquitting the Opposite Party on the basis of the evidence led on the side of the complaint. Moreover, this Court also found that the complaint case is of the year 1997 which was filed almost three decades ago. Even after the judgment of acquittal, the present application was filed on 19.09. 2008 which is pending for almost 17 to 18 years.

6. Taking into consideration the nature of the offence involved in the present application and the delay, this Court is not inclined to grant leave to the complainant.

7. Accordingly, the CRLLP is dismissed.

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Debasis