[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Sanjay Kumar Sahu @ Sanjya vs State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party on 16 December, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4629 of 2025
Sanjay Kumar Sahu @ Sanjya ..... Petitioner
Kumar Sahoo
Represented by Adv. -
Saumya Ranjan Pradhan
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented by Adv. -
Miss B.K. Sahu, AGA
Mitu Kumar Biswal,jayashree
Biswal,s.r.acharya,m.dehuri
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
16.12.2025
Order No.
03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the Informant-Opposite Party No.2 and learned
counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the prayer
made therein.
3. By filing the present application under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. which corresponds to Section 528 of the BNSS the
Petitioner seeks to invoke inherent power of this Court to quash
the entire criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.1986 of 2024 now
pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur, Ganjam
which corresponds to Berhampur Mahila P.S. Case No.172 of
2024 which was registered for commission of an offence
punishable under Sections 498-A/323/324/354-A/506/34 of IPC
read with section 4 of the D.P. Act.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended
that the Petitioner no.1 is the husband and other Petitioners are in-
laws family members of the Opposite Party No.2-Informant/
victim. He further contended that due to a misunderstanding a
matrimonial discord arose between the Petitioner. The present FIR
was lodged at the instance of the wife-Opposite Party No.2
implicating the Petitioner as well as other in-laws family
members. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that
as per the FIR allegation the Opposite Party No.2 lodged the FIR
at Berhampur Mahila P.S. on 31.05.2023 alleging that she got
married to the Petitioner No.1 and at the time of marriage the
Petitioner No.1 was given dowry articles to the tune of
Rs.5,00,000/- cash, gold and silver ornaments, and other
household articles. She has further stated that seven days after the
marriage her husband and other in-laws started torturing her
physically as well as mentally demanding more dowry. When she
refused to fulfil such additional demand of dowry she has been
subjected to more harassment and torture. Accordingly, she had
lodged the FIR as has been indicated hereinabove.
5. After conclusion of the investigation a charge sheet has
been filed on 28.12.2024 thereafter cognizance of the offence has
been taken vide order dated 31.12.2024 by the learned S.D.J.M.,
Berhampur for commission of an offence punishable under
Sections 498-A/323/324/354-A/506/34 of IPC read with section 4
of the D.P. Act.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that
during the pendency of the above noted criminal case a divorce
proceeding bearing C.P. No.120 of 2025 was initiated at the
instance of Opposite Party No.2-wife before the learned Judge,
Family Court, Berhampur, Ganjam. The learned Judge, Family
Court, Berampur, vide her judgment dated 29.10.2025, has
granted a mutual decree of divorce under section 13B of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to the Parties. Accordingly, the
marriage between the Petitioner No.1 and the Opposite Party No.2
has been dissolved. As per the judgment dated 29.10.2025 the
marriage between the Petitioner No.1 and Opposite Party No.2
was solemnized on 31.05.2023 and was dissolved by a grant of
decree of divorce on mutual consent. Learned counsel for the
Petitioner at this juncture contended that the aforesaid application
under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed before the
learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur in pursuannce of
amicable settlement of the dispute. As per the terms and
conditions agreed upon by the Parties it was specifically agreed
that the Parties shall filed a joint petition before the learned Judge,
Family Court for grant of a decree of divorce. It was also agreed
that the Parties shall withdraw the cases filed against each other
including the present criminal case. In the aforesaid context,
learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the affidavit filed
before this court by the Opposite Party No.2 dated 12.12.2025
which has been sworn before the Oath Commissioner of this
Court. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner
contended that a further continuance of the present proceeding
would be an abuse of process of law and that no purpose would be
achieved by allowing the present criminal proceeding to continue.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the Informant while
supporting the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
Petitioner submitted before this Court that it is a fact that the
marriage between the Petitioner No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 has
been dissolved in the meantime. He further submitted that the
petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed
pursuant to an amicable settlement between the parties which was
arrived at the intervention of relatives and well-wishers from both
sides. He also did not dispute the fact that it has been specifically
agreed to withdraw the present criminal case. Learned counsel for
the Informant-Opposite Party No.2 further contended that since
the matter has been amicably resolved and in view of the affidavit
filed by the Informant-Opposite Party No.2, the Opposite Party
No.2 will have no objection in the event the entire criminal
proceeding is quashed.
8. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted
that although a case has been registered under the sections as has
bene indicated hereinabove, however, in the meantime, the Parties
have resolved their dispute amicably and that they have decided to
part ways gracefully. Accordingly their application for grant of
mutual decree of divorce has already been allowed by the learned
Judge, Family Court, Berhampur. In view of the subsequent
change in the circumstance and the development thereafter,
learned counsel for the State contended that she will have no
objection in the event this court passes any order which would
secure the ends of justice.
9. Having heard learned counsels appearing for the respective
Parties, on a careful examination of their submission, taking note
of the subsequent development that had taken place since the
present matter, further keeping in view the fact that the marriage
has been dissolved by grant of a decree of divorce under Section
13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act on mutual consent of the parties
and the Parties have agreed to part ways gracefully subject to the
terms and conditions agreed upon by them, this Court is of the
view that it would be a futile exercise to allow the trial to continue
knowing fully that the same would not result in conviction. In
view of the aforesaid position, this Court is of the view that the
present case is a fit case where this court should exercise its
inherent power to quash the entire criminal proceeding.
Accordingly, this court has no hesitation in question the entire
criminal proceeding initiated against the Petitioner at the instance
of the Opposite Party No.2. Hence, the entire criminal proceeding
arising out of Berhampur Mahila P.S. Case No.172 of 2024 which
corresponds to G.R. Case No.1986 of 2024 now pending in the
file of learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur, Ganjam is hereby quashed.
10. Accordingly, the CRLMC application stands allowed.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Sisir
Designation: Personal Assistant
