[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Babula Hantal vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 26 March, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.5180 of 2025
Babula Hantal .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Saroj Kumar Padhy, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite Party (s)
Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC
Mr. Ghanashyam Banji, Adv. (for O.P. No.2)
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
ORDER
Order No. 26.03.2026
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. By filing the present CRLMC, the Petitioner, against
whom the allegation of kidnapping the victim (Opposite
Party No.2) is made, has prayed for quashing the entire
criminal proceedings initiated against him vide Damanjodi
P.S. Case No.24 of 2024 corresponding to T.R. Case No.70 of
2024, pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Court under POCSO Act, Koraput at Jeypore.
3. Heard learned counsel for all the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the F.I.R.
was lodged by the mother of the victim alleging commission
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF
ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 30-Mar-2026 19:13:38
of offence of kidnapping under Section 363 of I.P.C., which,
during the course of investigation, culminated into offences
under POCSO Act. It is submitted that the victim was
subsequently rescued and the Petitioner came to be arrested.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that
the victim, in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement has categorically
stated that she was in love relationship with the Petitioner
since Class-VIII and had voluntarily left her parental home
and accompanied the Petitioner. It is submitted that they
resided together and solemnized marriage.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that
the victim has fully supported the case of the Petitioner and
has deposed that she had voluntarily eloped and married
him. It is contended that the physical relationship between
them was consensual in nature and that the allegations of
force were made under pressure from her mother and the
police authorities.
7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that
victim has now attained the age of majority and has filed an
affidavit expressing her willingness to marry and reside with
the Petitioner.
8. On perusal of the case record, it appears that on
13.01.2026, the victim girl appeared before this Court
through virtual mode and filed an affidavit. This Court,
taking note of the same, passed the following order:
"2. The victim girl has appeared before this Court
through Virtual Mode. She has also filed an
affidavit inter alia stating as under:-
"5. That, we were known to each
other since long and that we were in
relationship, when the matter came to
the knowledge of my family members
and the family members of the
Petitioner, the matter become
aggravated and the local community
person interfered in the matter and
did not allow my relationship with
the Petitioner further due to their ego
clash and caste difference.
6. That in the meantime the dispute
has been resolved in presence of
parents of both the parents of mine
and petitioner.
7. That our marriage has been fixed I
am going to marry the petitioner I
wanted to lead a happy and peaceful
life with the Petitioner."
3. In the present case, the informant is the mother
of the victim girl. Learned counsel for the petitioner
seeks for an adjournment to ensure the presence of
the mother of victim on the next date of hearing."
9. Today, the victim girl and her mother are present
through virtual mode from the Damanjodi Police Station.
Upon interaction, the victim has categorically stated that she
is no longer willing to marry the present Petitioner.
10. Although the statement of the victim recorded under
Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the affidavit filed earlier before this
Court prima facie indicate that she had voluntarily
accompanied the Petitioner and was in a consensual
relationship with him, her subsequent statement before this
Court expressing unwillingness to marry the Petitioner
creates a significant doubt requiring deeper scrutiny.
11. In view of such contradictory stands taken by the victim,
this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter
involves disputed questions of fact which cannot be
conclusively adjudicated at this stage. The truthfulness,
voluntariness and circumstances surrounding the
relationship between the parties, as well as the allegations
forming the basis of the prosecution case, can only be
determined upon appreciation of evidence during trial.
12. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to record any
definitive findings on the merits of the case at this stage. A
thorough trial is necessary to ascertain the veracity of the
allegations and to arrive at a just conclusion in accordance
with law.
13. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed, being
devoid of merit at this stage.
14. It is, however, made clear that any observations made
herein are only for the purpose of adjudication of the present
petition and shall not influence the trial court while deciding
the case on merits.
15. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Sipun
