The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No. 89 of 2025 Ashok Kanhar …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Sk. Zafarulla, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and another …. Opposite Party(s)
Legal Reasoning
Ms. S. Moharana, ASC Mr. A.K. Budhia, Advocate (O.P.No.2) CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. 02. 1. 2.
Decision
ORDER 11.02.2025 Heard. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. in Manamunda P.S. Case No. 42 of 2021 came to be registered against the petitioner corresponding to C.T. Case No. 75 of 2021, pending in the court of the learned JMFC, Kantamal registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 452/506/379 (1) of the IPC. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 07.04.2021 midnight while informant/victim was sleeping in her house along with her two children and her husband was absent, the petitioner entered into the house of the informant and committed sexual intercourse with her forcefully by the point of weapon and by Page 1 of 5 giving threat that if she raise hulla then he will kill her children. It is further alleged that on 09.04.2021 the informant disclosed the fact to her husband and thereafter she lodged the FIR. 4. The victim subsequently married to one Manoj Kaanr. The marital life of the victim is marred because of the pendency of investigation in the present case. Therefore, at this stage, the victim/informant is no more willing to continue with the prosecution against the petitioner. Confronted with this situation, the informant is ready and willing to settle the dispute with the petitioner. 5. Petitioner and opposite party no.2, the informant are present in Court and being represented and identified by their respective counsels. They have also filed self-attested copies of their Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record. 6. From the certified copy of the proceeding handed over to this Court by Mr. Zafarulla, learned counsel for the petitioner it reveals that investigation in the present case is still going on. 7. On the request of this Court, Ms. Moharana, learned Addl. Standing Counsel interacted with the victim and the victim lady stated that because of the ongoing investigation in the present case Page 2 of 5 initiated by her against the petitioner, her marital life has been disturbed. However, at the same time, she stated that the allegation made in the FIR against the petitioner is true. But she does not want to further prosecute the petitioner. She further stated that the FIR may be quashed so that she can live her life peacefully without any hassles being around. 8. The parties have filed a joint affidavit dated 17.01.2025 inter alia stating as under:- 1. That I am the informant/Victim in C.T Case No.75 of 2021 pending in the court of learned JMFC, Kantamal arising out of Manamunda PS Case No. 42 of 2021 for commission of offence under section 452/376(l)/506 of IPG read with Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and as well as Opp.Party No.2 in this Criminal Misc Case and am well acquainted with the fact and contents of the case. 2. That the deponent/ informant and the petitioner belong to same village and there was some dispute between the parties. In the meantime matter has been amicably the intervention of village gentries and well-wishers of both the parties. Therefore the deponent has decided not to further proceed in the present case and the deponent has no objection if the entire criminal proceeding in the above case will be quashed for the interest of justice. 3. That the deponent swear this affidavit that matter has been amicably settled between the parties. Accordingly the deponent does not want to further proceed in this case and wants to compound the case relating to C.T Case No.75 of 2021 pending in the court of learned JMFC, Kantamal.” the parties on settled between Page 3 of 5 9. On the query from the Court, opposite partyno.2 stated that investigation in the present case is still going on. However, they have arrived at a settlement and she does not want to proceed with the matter and pursuance to the same the petitioner has filed this petition seeking quashing of the proceeding. 10. Ms. Moharana, learned counsel for the State submits that since the parties have settled the dispute and file affidavit before this Court, there is no legal impediment to quash the proceeding. 11. Regard being had to the allegation made by the opposite party no.2 against the petitioner and the fact that the victim lady herself has stated that she is not willing to prosecute the petitioner anymore and the investigation in the present case is still going on and they have settled the dispute and filed affidavit before this Court, the petition deserves merits. Therefore, at this stage, I am inclined to allow the present petition. Further, continuation of the present proceeding will not endure to the benefit to either parties and, therefore, in these circumstances subjecting the petitioner to rigors of the trial is destined to be futile exercise. The case of the petitioner is directly covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Page 4 of 5 another reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 and B.S. Joshi & others vs. State of Haryana & another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675. 12. However, regard being had to the ordeal undergone by the victim in the present case and by the circumstances confronted by which she has entered into settlement with the petitioner, I am of the view that she should be compensated adequately. Hence, an exemplary cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) is imposed on the petitioner to be deposited before the learned JMFC, Kantamal in C.T. Case No.75 of 2021 within a period of four weeks. The petitioner has also agreed to make good the payment being positive gesture towards the victim. Subject to the petitioner depositing the aforesaid amount, which would be disbursed to the complainant, the criminal proceeding in connection with Manamunda P.S. Case No. 42 of 2021 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 75 of 2021, pending in the court of the learned JMFC, Kantamal is quashed. 13. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Ashok Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 12-Feb-2025 13:54:51 Judge Page 5 of 5