[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Suryakanta Pattnaik vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 17 February, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.5419 of 2025
Suryakanta Pattnaik .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Ranjit Mohanty, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite Party(s)
Mr. Sonak Mishra, ASC
Mr. Bibhuti Ranjan Mohanty, Adv.
Mr. M.K. Swain, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 17.02.2026
04. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. In the present CRLMC, the Petitioner against whom the
criminal proceeding as per the provision under the
POCSO Act is instituted, has prayed for quashing of the
said criminal proceeding in connection with G.R. Case
No.2 of 2025 arising out of Kudanagari P.S Case No.325 of
2024 pending before the Court of learned Additional
District Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Kendrapara.
3. Heard.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits
that the Petitioner and the girl for whom the Petitioner has
been booked for the above noted offences, are presently
leading a peaceful conjugal life. He further contends that
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 18-Feb-2026 18:06:39
at the time of lodging of the F.I.R the girl was major. In
order to prove the said fact learned counsel for the
Petitioner also draws the attention of this Court to the
birth certificate of the girl who is present in Court today
along with her husband/Petitioner and father who had
lodged the F.I.R in question. He, accordingly, prays for
allowing the prayer made in this CRLMC.
5. It is well settled that although the offences under Section
137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under the
POCSO Act are non-compoundable, the High Court, in
exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C., is not denuded of power to quash the criminal
proceeding where the dispute is essentially private and
matrimonial in nature and the parties have voluntarily
arrived at a genuine and complete settlement. The
underlying object of such exercise is to secure the ends of
justice and to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.
Where the continuation of the criminal proceeding, despite
an amicable settlement, would serve no fruitful purpose
and would only perpetuate bitterness between the parties,
the High Court would be justified in interdicting the
prosecution, particularly when the informant himself has
unequivocally expressed his consent for such quashing.
6. Considering the contents of the joint affidavit filed by
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
father of the girl and following the ratio laid down by the
Date: 18-Feb-2026 18:06:39
Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and
another1, and two other reported cases of this Court in
Lokanath @ Anadi Sethi and four others v. State of Orissa
and four others2, and Sansuri alias Khageswar Lenka and
another -vrs.- State of Orissa and Another3, wherein this
Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be
served in allowing such proceedings to continue the
criminal proceeding in the aforesaid case as it will only
lead to abuse the process of law.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion and considerations,
this Court finds that the girl for whom her father/Opposite
Party No.2 had lodged the F.I.R in question, was major at
the time of occurrence. Hence, the offences under the
POCSO Act against the Petitioner/husband of the said girl
is not made out. This Court, therefore, allows the present
application. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding
initiated against the Petitioner vide G.R. Case No.2 of 2025
arising out of Kudanagari P.S. Case No.325 of 2024
pending before the Court of learned A.D.J-cum-Special
Judge (POCSO), Kendrapara stands quashed.
8. At this juncture, this Court also directs the Petitioner to
file an undertaking before I.I.C, Kudanagari Police Station,
Designation: Personal Assistant
2014 (II) OLR 29
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 18-Feb-2026 18:06:39
3 2014 (II) OLR 452
Kendrapara stating therein that he will never torture his
wife and take care of her.
9. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of.
10. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Ayaskanta
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 18-Feb-2026 18:06:39
