Orissa High Court
Simranbit Sahoo @ Simranjit vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 20 March, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No. 133 of 2025
Simranbit Sahoo @ Simranjit .... Petitioner(s)
Sahu
Mr. Rajkishore Swain, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Party(s)
Ms. S. Moharana, ASC
Mr. D. Swain, Advocate (O.P.No.2)
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 20.03.2025
02. 1. Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. in
Cuttack Mahila P.S. Case No. 108 of 2023 came to be registered
against the petitioner corresponding to G.R. Case No. 495 of 2023,
pending in the court of the learned SDJM, Cuttack.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the marriage of
petitioner and opposite party no.2 was solemnized on 01.07.2021
and after the marriage the parties spend only 15 days happily.
Thereafter, problems between the parties in the marital life started.
The petitioner and opposite party no.2 differed from each other in
their test, attitude, behavior and aptitude. However, opposite party
no.2 has lodged an F.I.R. on 06.08.2023 before the Mahila Police
Station alleging therein some physical and mental tortured by the
petitioner and other in-laws members which turned to registered as
Mahila P.S. Case No.108/2023 corresponding to G.R. Case
No.495/2023 pending in the court of learned SDJM, Cuttack.
4. After investigation, charge sheet in the present case has
been filed on 29.09.2023 for the alleged commission of offence
punishable under Sections 498-A/323/506/406/34 of IPC read with
Section 4 of the D.P. Act. Before the trial could commence, the
parties have entered into a settlement and 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 have applied for
dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent. The Judge, Family
Court, Cuttack in C.P. No.287 of 2024 vide its judgment dated
04.01.2025 allowed the same and dissolved the marriage of the
petitioner and opposite party no.2 by mutual consent. The petitioner
has also paid Rs.10,00,000/- as permanent alimony to opposite
party no.2.
6. The 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 opposite party no.2 has filed an affidavit dated
13.03.2025 inter alia stating as under:-
"1. That I have arrayed as opposite party No.-2 to the
aforesaid proceeding filed at the instance of petitioner,
Simranjit Sahu.
2. That the aforesaid proceeding has filed by the petitioner
challenging the Mahila PS Case No. 108/23 corresponding
to GR case no-495/23 pending in the court of the Learned
SDJM, Cuttack and consequent upon quashing the entire
proceeding pending against the present petitioner.
3. That to end all litigations, we have entered into a
compromise and accordingly filed a compromise petition in
a Divorce proceeding pending between under sectio -13 (b)
of Hindu marriage Act. In the said compromise petition, we
have taken a ground that all pending proceedings will be
withdrawn/closed in course of the said compromise and the
final decree has already passed in the Divorce proceeding.
4. That consequent upon the compromise, I have already
received the full consideration of Rs-10,00,000(Ten Lakhs)
from the petitioner as permanent alimony, peace and amity
have already been restored. So, I have no objection if the
GR case pending against the petitioner bearing no-495/23
before the learned SDJM, Cuttack is quashed and
consequent upon quashing the entire proceeding pending
against the present petitioner."
7. On the query from the Court, opposite partyno.2, who is
appearing in Court submits that she has no issue left with the
petitioner or the family of the petitioner, as she has already received
Rs.10,00,000/- from the petitioner as permanent alimony. Hence,
she does not want to prosecute the petitioner.
8. Ms. Moharana, learned counsel for the State submits that
since the dispute is arising out of a matrimonial discord and the
parties have settled their dispute and filed affidavit before this
Court, there is no legal impediment to quash the proceeding.
9. 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 enure 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.
10. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding in connection with
Cuttack Mahila P.S. Case No. 108 of 2023 corresponding to G.R.
Case No. 495 of 2023, pending in the court of the learned SDJM,
Cuttack is quashed.
11. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Ashok
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 21-Mar-2025 11:01:33
