Orissa High Court
Hemant Kumar Choudhury And vs State Of Odisha And Another ..... ... on 9 September, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.3199 of 2024
Hemant Kumar Choudhury and ..... Petitioners
others
Represented By Adv. -
Pravat Kumar Mohanty
-versus-
State Of Odisha and another ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Binod Bihari Das
Smt. Sasmita Nayak, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
09.09.2025
Order No.
02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid 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. The present application has been filed under Section 528 of
BNSS, thereby invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to
quash the entire criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.919 of 2018
pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M.(S), Cuttack for alleged
offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 506, 406, 34 of
IPC read with 4 D.P. Act.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that
the present Petitioner, happens to be the husband of the Opposite
Party No.2-wife. He further contended that due to a matrimonial
discord between the husband and wife the present FIR was lodged at
the instance of the Opposite Party No.2-wife. He further submitted
that after filing of the present FIR at the instance of the wife in the
year 2018 a civil proceeding was initiated before the learned Judge,
Family Court, Cuttack under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act,
1955. The aforesaid civil proceeding was initiated with the mutual
consent of both the Petitioner and Opposite Party No.2 for a decree
of mutual divorce. The learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack vide
judgment dated 20.11.2021 allowed the proceeding for mutual
divorce filed under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act and
accordingly, the parties have been granted a mutual decree of
divorce.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that as per
the understanding between the husband and wife they have been
decided to part ways gracefully and accordingly they both filed the
application under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act for mutual
divorce. It was also contended that they have also agreed to
withdraw all the cases against each other including the criminal
cases. Accordingly, the present application has been filed at the
instance of the Petitioner-husband for quashing of the entire criminal
proceeding. He further contended that the Opposite Party No.2-wife
has no objection in the event the present criminal proceeding is
quashed as the dispute between the husband and wife has been
amicably settled. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner
contended that the entire criminal proceeding against the present
Petitioner be quashed in the interest of justice.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.2-wife
supported the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the
Petitioner. He further submitted that by virtue of the mutual decree
of divorce dated 20.11.2021 of the learned Judge, Family Court,
Cuttack the martial relationship between the two has been severed
on mutual consent. He further submitted that both the Petitioner and
Opposite Party No.2 have agreed to be separated from each other by
virtue of the mutual decree of divorce. He further submitted that the
Opposite Party No.2 does not have any objection in the event the
entire criminal proceeding is quashed.
7. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that
since the parties have settled the matrimonial dispute mutually and a
mutual decree of divorce has already been granted in the meantime,
he will have no objection in the event this Court passes any
appropriate order keeping in view the factual background of the
present case.
8. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts,
further taking note of the fact that the parties are now separated on
account of the mutual decree of divorce vide judgment dated
20.11.2021 of the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in C.P.
No.227 of 2021 and is not disputed that the relationship between the
two has come to an end. Now the question that arises for
determination is as to whether the present criminal proceeding which
was initiated prior to the filing of the civil proceeding at the instance
of the Opposite Party No.2-wife is to be allowed to continue or not?
While answering the aforesaid question, this Court found that the
parties by virtue of mutual consent have agreed for separation and
accordingly a mutual decree of divorce has been granted. Moreover,
in the present case the Opposite Party No.2-wife has no objection to
the quashing of the criminal proceeding which was initiated
basically on the allegation of dowry torture, i.e., under Section 498-
A of the IPC has become irrelevant as the marital relationship does
not exist anymore. Further, taking into consideration the submission
made by the learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 that the
Opposite Party No.2-wife has no objection to the quashing of the
entire criminal proceeding, this Court has no hesitation in coming to
a conclusion that further continuance of the present criminal
proceeding would not be in the interest of the parties. In the
aforesaid factual background, this Court is of the view that the
present case is a fit case where this Court can exercise its inherent
power to bring an end to the criminal proceeding. Accordingly, the
entire criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.919 of 2018 is hereby
quashed.
9. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the CRLMC
application stands allowed.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Page 4 of 4.
