Orissa High Court
Prasanta Kumar Nayak And vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 12 March, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.761 of 2025
Prasanta Kumar Nayak and .... Petitioner(s)
others
Dr. P. C. Dash, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Party(s)
Ms. S. Moharana, ASC
Ms. S. Devi, Advocate for the victim
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 12.03.2025
02. 1. Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. dated
04.03.2016 in Rajkanika P.S. Case No.51 of 2016 came to be
registered against the petitioners for the alleged commission of the
offences under Sections 354C/376(2)(I)(n)/506/34 of I.P.C. On the
ground of settlement, the petitioners are seeking quashing of the
F.I.R and the consequential proceedings.
3. The allegation against the petitioners in the F.I.R. is that,
on 04.03.2016 at about 7.00 P.M., the informant/victim lodged a
written report alleging therein that the petitioner No.1 had proposed
her to marry him and by giving false assurance, he had kept sexual
relationship with her. When she asked him to marry, the petitioner
No.1 tried to avoid. Hence, this case.
4. After investigation, charge-sheet in the present case has
been filed on 27.09.2021 for the alleged commission of offences
punishable under Section 3540C/506/34/376(1)/376(2)(n) of I.P.C.
against the petitioners. On 30.09.2024, the learned Court below has
taken cognizance of the offences as mentioned above against the
petitioners. Before the charge is framed and trial is commenced, the
parties have entered into a settlement. On the basis of the settlement
terms, the present petition has been filed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners by taking me to the
charge-sheet submits that the graver offence is basically alleged
against the husband-petitioner No.1, who has now married the
informant/opposite party No.2.
6. The petitioners and the opposite party No.2 are present in
the Court and 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.
7. The opposite party No.2, the victim who is present in
Court has filed an affidavit dated 06.03.2025 inter alia stating as
under:-
"1. That I am the deponent/ victim of S.T. Case No. 165
of 2021 in connection with G.R. case no. 106 of 2016
arising out of Rajkanika P.S. case no-0050/20I6 dated
04.03.2016 pending in the file of learned District &
Sessions Judge, Kendrapara for the commission of alleged
offences nder sections-354(c),376(1, (2), (n), 506, 34
I.P.C.
2. That this case arises out of love and affection between
the parties for which this CRLMC petition has been filed,
however in the mean while the matter has been amicably
compromised between parties including the victim and
petitioners on being interference of the family members.
The petitioner no-1 is married to the victim and now they
have a girl child. It is settled between the parties on
account of compromise. Accordingly the two family
members, victim and petitioner having good terms to each
others without any difficulties in any manner whatsoever.
3. That in view of the above premises I am the
deponent/victim is no more interested to proceed with the
criminal case against the petitioners in the present case in
any manner whatsoever and hence prayed for if the entire
criminal proceedings will be quashed or set aside against
the petitioners, then I have no objection at all.
4. That the fact stated above all are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief and this affidavit is also free from
any type of threat, coercion, undue influence in any
manner whatsoever."
8. On query from the Court, the opposite party No.2 submits
she has already married with the petitioner No.1 and blessed with a
female child and leading a happy conjugal life. To save her marital
life, she has entered into a settlement with the petitioners.
Therefore, she does not want to prosecute the matter with the
petitioners.
9. Ms. Moharana, learned Additional Standing Counsel for
the State submits that since the dispute is arising out of a
matrimonial discord and the parties have settled their dispute and
the victim has already been accepted by the family of the petitioner
No.1 and in-law sand out of their wedlock a child is born, this Court
may give indulgence in the present matter as there is no legal
impediment.
10. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have settled
their dispute and in order to save the marriage of the victim and the
future of the child born out of the wedlock, I am inclined to allow
this petition. Moreover, after the victim having furnished an
affidavit before this Court, subjecting the petitioners to the rigors of
the trial would destine to be a futile exercise. The case of the
petitioners are 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,
Therefore, the petition deserves merit.
11. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding in connection with
S.T. Case No.165 of 2021 arising out of G.R. Case No.106 of 2016
corresponding to Rajkanika P.S. Case No.51 of 2016 pending in the
Court of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Kendrapara and the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners are
quashed.
12. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 13-Mar-2025 17:25:14
