[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Hari Krushna Mahanty vs Ranjita Choudhury .... Opp. Party on 5 February, 2026
Author: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
Bench: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
RPFAM No.43 of 2026
Hari Krushna Mahanty .... Petitioner
Mr. Dharanidhar Nayak, Sr. Advocate
along with Ms. A. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Ranjita Choudhury .... Opp. Party
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
ORDER
05.02.2026
Order No. Hybrid Mode
01. 1. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the order
dated 28.11.2025 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court,
Berhampur in Cr.P. No.360 of 2017.
Though several facts and issues are involved since
initiation of the matter before the learned Judge, Family Court
in 2017, the issue that falls for adjudication in the present
proceeding before this Court is that the petitioner after
receiving demand draft no.723068 dated 23.10.2024, drawn
on State Bank of India for an amount of Rs.30,000/- on
05.09.2025 which he had earlier deposited as cost for setting
aside has not deposited the money in the court to be handed
over the amount to the opposite party as directed by order of
the Court dated 05.09.2025. Payment of ₹30,000/- (rupees
thirty thousand) only was directed by the learned Court as a
condition for restoring the matter for readjudication, which
was allowed ex-parte against petitioner allowing the petition of
the opposite party-wife in the marriage U/s.125 Cr.P.C. (since
repealed).
2. Heard learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner at
length.
3. By order dated 12.11.2024 passed in a petition filed
under Section 126 (2) of Cr.P.C., i.e., the Cr.P. no.243 of 2022
(226/22), the learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur had
recalled/set aside the earlier ex-parte judgment dated
26.04.2019. The earlier judgment dated 26.04.2019 passed in
Cr.P. No.360 of 2017 and restored the petition to its file.
4. Apparently, as directed by the learned Family Judge the
petitioner-wife had received the bank draft on 12.11.2024 but
returned the said draft on 05.09.2025 as she found it difficult
to deposit and encash. Concededly, the draft was received by
the petitioner-husband on 05.09.2025, but is yet to be
encashed for depositing the amount of cash to be received by
the wife.
5. On being persuaded by the submissions of the learned
Senior Advocate for the petitioner, the petitioner is granted
further time, though reluctantly, to deposit the amount.
6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is
instructed by the instructing counsel that the petitioner shall
produce the demand draft no.723068 dated 23.10.2024
amounting to Rs.30,000/-. In response to the said submission
the matter was passed over, directing the petitioner to file
affidavit.
7. Upon resumption of the proceeding of the Court after
lunch break, affidavit of date is filed by the petitioner present
in Court. The affidavit is taken on record. Scanned copy be
updated.
It is stated in the affidavit that the petitioner will produce
the demand draft no.723068 dated 23.10.2024 Rs.30,000/-
before this Court within two weeks. Apparently, the demand
draft drawn on State Bank of India has not been encashed.
The petitioner further undertakes that he will deposit by
20.02.2026 the amount of Rs.30,000/- before the learned
Judge, Family Court, upon filing a petition to that effect in the
pending proceeding.
8. The learned Judge, Family Court shall allow the amount
to be kept in a manner so that it can be disbursed to be
received by the opposite party-wife in the marriage. To that
effect appropriate order shall be passed by the learned Judge,
Family Court, Berhampur.
The RPFAM shall be listed for orders on 25.02.2026.
I.A. No.65 of 2026.
9. It is submitted by the learned instructing counsel Ms.
Mishra that inadvertent typographical error(s) has crept into
the petition. She seeks leave to carry out necessary
correction(s).
Leave granted.
The learned counsel is allowed to carry out the necessary
correction in the prayer of the petition (and other places if
required) i.e. Cr.P. No.161 of 2024 to be corrected as Cr. P.
No.191 of 2024.
The correction shall be endorsed by the signature of the
learned instructing counsel Ms.Mishra and shall be
countersigned by the Court Master.
10. The I.A. arises out of the present RPFAM seeking stay of
order dated 16.01.2026 passed by the learned Judge, Family
Court, Berhampur in Cr. P. No.191 of 2024 arising out of Cr.
P. No.360 of 2017.
It is submitted that the petitioner did not and does not
intend to violate any condition as put by the learned Judge,
Family Court for restoring the matter by order dated
12.11.2024.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner
reiterates his submissions as noted above. He submits that
unless the order dated 16.01.2026 passed by the learned
Judge, Family Court, Berhampur issuing NBW is stayed, the
petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and shall be highly
prejudiced.
11. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioner and after perusing the affidavit of date filed by the
petitioner and in view of the orders passed today as above in
the petition, in the interim it is directed that the order dated
16.01.2026 shall remain stayed till 2nd March, 2026.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
List for orders on 25.02.2026.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo)
Judge
Gs
