Orissa High Court
Saroj Kumar @ Saroj Acharya vs State Of Odisha & Anr. ..... Opp. Parties on 11 September, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.3020 of 2024
Saroj Kumar @ Saroj Acharya ..... Petitioners
& Ors.
Represented By Adv. -
Susanta Kumar Baral
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Anr. ..... Opp. Parties
Represented By Adv. -
C.M. Singh, A.S.C.
Sunil Kumar Swain,
Adv. for O.P. No.2
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
11.09.2025
Order No.
02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party
No.2. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.
3. By filing the present application under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C. the Petitioners seeking quashing of the entire criminal
proceeding arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.161 of 2022
which corresponds to G.R. Case No.2817 of 2022 now pending in
the court of learned JMFC, (Cog. Taking-III), Cuttack. The
abovenoted case was registered on the basis of an F.I.R. filed
before the Govindpur P.S. for alleged commission of an offences
punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 294, 506, 34 of the IPC
read with Section 4 of the DP Act.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners at the outset contended
that though the F.I.R. was lodged at the instance of the Opposite
Party No.2 making allegation against the Petitioner No.1-husband
and his family members, however, while the aforesaid criminal
case was pending, a proceeding was initiated before the learned
Judge, Family Court, Puri under Section 13B of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955. The aforesaid proceeding was registered as
CP No.110 of 2024 which was filed jointly by the Petitioner No.1
and the Opposite Party No.2. He further contended that by virtue
of a judgment dated 25.11.2024, the aforesaid Civil Proceeding
filed under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act was allowed
and that the marriage between Petitioner No.1 and the Opposite
Party No.2 has been dissolved by granting of a decree of divorce
on mutual consent. The judgment further reveals that the
Petitioner No.1 agreed and he has paid a permanent alimony of
Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs). Accordingly, a separation
between the Petitioner No.1 and the Opposite Party No.2 has
taken place. On account of the grant of decree of divorce by the
learned Judge, Family Court on 25.11.2024.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners at the outset contended
that although the Civil Proceeding was allowed by grant of a
decree of divorce on mutual consent, however, the present
criminal proceeding was pending. He further submitted that as
agreed between the parties, the present proceeding was to be
closed. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioners
contended that further continuance of the present criminal
proceeding would be an abuse of process of law and that the same
would not serve the ends of justice.
6. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 on the other
hand contended supported the contentions raised by learned
counsel for the Petitioners. Further, referring to the affidavit filed
by Opposite Party No.2 in court today, which is taken on record,
learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 submitted that the
matter has been amicably settled in presence of the family
members of both sides and, accordingly, it has been decided to
withdraw the criminal proceeding arising out of Govindpur P.S.
Case No.161 of 2022 which corresponds to G.R. Case No.2817 of
2022. He further submitted that the Opposite Party No.2 has no
objection to the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding as has
been indicated hereinabove.
7. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended
that as per the materials on record it appears that the parties have
been divorced by grant of a mutual decree of divorce. He further
submitted that from the affidavit of the Opposite Party No.2 it
appears that she is no more interested in pursuing the present
criminal case. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the
State contended that he will have no objection in the event this
Court passes any appropriate order in the facts and circumstances
of the present case.
8. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties,
on a careful examination of the background facts, further taking
note of the subsequent development, particularly, the judgment
dated 25.11.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri
thereby granting a decree of divorce on mutual consent under
Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, further keeping in view
the evidence of the Opposite Party No.2 before the learned Judge,
Family Court as well as the affidavit filed in court today, this
Court is of the view that there is no doubt that the matrimonial
dispute has been settled on compromise between the parties. In
the aforesaid factual background, this Court is of the view that
further continuance of the present criminal proceeding would be
an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, this Court finds the
present case a fit case to exercise the inherent power of this Court
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the criminal
proceeding arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.161 of 2022
which corresponds to G.R. Case No.2817 of 2022 is hereby
quashed.
9. With the aforesaid observation/ directions, the CRLMC
stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 12-Sep-2025 19:23:33
