Orissa High Court
Ratikanta Dakua vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 20 February, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No. 475 of 2025
Ratikanta Dakua .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. S.K. Tripathy, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Party(s)
Mr. B. Nayak, AGA
Mr. A.P. Mishra, Advocate (O.P.No.2)
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 20.02.2025
02. 1. Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. in
Baria P.S. Case No. 80 of 2019 came to be registered against the
petitioner corresponding to G.R. Case No. 328 of 2019, pending in
the court of the learned SDJM, Champua.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that marriage was
solemnized between the petitioner and opposite party no.2 on
06.06.2014 as per their caste and custom. After marriage, they were
leading their life happily and also blessed with a daughter on
24.07.2015. It is alleged that her husband started subjecting her
mental and physical torture therefore she left the matrimonial home
and started living with her parents. Thereafter, opposite party no.2
filed a complaint petition under section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C before the
learned SDJM, Champua which was subsequently sent for
investigation and consequentially Baria P.S. Case No.80 of 2019
was registered against the petitioner.
4. After investigation, charge sheet in the present case has
been filed on 28.03.2020 for the alleged commission of offence
punishable under Section 498-A/294/323/506 of IPC. Before the
trial is commenced, parties have entered into a settlement. As per
the settlement terms, parties have also applied for dissolution of
their marriage by mutual consent under Section 13(B) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, which was allowed the learned Family Judge,
Keonjhar vide its order dated 25.06.2022 in C.P. No. 185 of 2021 In
lieu of the settlement, the petitioner has already paid Rs.6,00,000/-
as permanent alimony to the opposite party no.2 and they have
agreed to terminate all the proceedings initiated against each other.
Therefore, on the basis of the settlement terms, the present petition
has been filed seeking quashing of the entire criminal prosecution.
5. Petitioner and opposite party no.2 the informant are
present in Court and being represented and identified by their
respective counsels. They have also filed self-attested copies of
their Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on
record. The parties have filed a joint compromise affidavit dated
20.02.2025 inter alia stating as under:-
"1. That on the complainant petition filed by opposite party
no.2 before the learned SDJM, Champua a complainant case
has been registered which was subsequently U/s 156 (3) of
Cr.P.C. send for investigation and Baria P.S. Case No.80 of
2019 was registerd which corresponds to G.R. Case No.328 of
2019 in the file of learned SDJM, Champua U/s 498-A, 294,
323, and 506 of Indian Penal Code was registered against the
petitioner.
2. That the petitioner has filed the aforesaid CRLMC with a
prayer to quash the aforesaid proceeding initiated against him
on the complainant made by opposite party no.2 on the ground
of compromise as in the meantime their application filed U/s 13
(B) of Hindu Marriage Act is allowed and the marriage
between both of them is dissolved.
3. That after the order of the learned Judge Family Court,
Keonjhar wherein he has allowed the petition filed under
Section 13 (B) of Hindu Marriage Act and the marriage
between both them are dissolved, they are running their life
separately and after that there is no more ill feeling between
them, hence files this joint affidavit to quash the proceeding
initiated against the petitioner.
4. That it is humbly pray, considering the above facts, the
proceeding initiated against the petitioner on information of
opposite party no.2 may kindly be dropped."
6. On the query from the Court, opposite partyno.2 reiterated
her statement that she indeed has received Rs.6,00,000/- as
permanent alimony from the petitioner and she does not have any
grievance left against the petitioner and join with the petitioner
praying for quashing of the criminal prosecution.
7. Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the State submits that since
the parties have settled the dispute and file affidavit before this
Court, there is no legal impediment to quash the proceeding.
8. Regard being had to the allegation made by the opposite
party no.2 against the petitioner and the fact that they have settled
the dispute and filed affidavit before this Court, I am inclined to
allow the present petition. Further, continuation of the present
proceeding will not endure to the benefit to either parties and,
therefore, in these circumstances subjecting the petitioner to rigors
of the trial is destined to be futile exercise. The case of the
petitioner is directly covered by 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.
9. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding in connection with
Baria P.S. Case No. 80 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 328
of 2019, pending in the court of the learned SDJM, Champua is
quashed.
10. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB (S.S. Mishra)
Location: High Court of Orissa
Judge
Ashok 18:54:12
Date: 20-Feb-2025
