1.Giridhari Pradhan 2.Rupei Pradhan 1.State of Odisha 2.Bijaylaxmi Ratawa … v. ….. CRLMC No.1390 of 2023 Bijayalaxmi Ratawa 1.State of Odisha 2.Giridhari Pradhan 3.Rupei Pradhan
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3082 of 2023 & CRLMC No.1390 of 2023 CRLMC No.3082 of 2023 1.Giridhari Pradhan 2.Rupei Pradhan 1.State of Odisha 2.Bijaylaxmi Ratawa ….. Vs. ….. CRLMC No.1390 of 2023 Bijayalaxmi Ratawa 1.State of Odisha 2.Giridhari Pradhan 3.Rupei Pradhan 4.Iswar Pradhan
Legal Reasoning
Petitioners Mr.B.P.Nanda, Advocate on behalf of Mr.Bidyalok Mohapatra, Advocate Opposite Parties Ms.S.Patnaik, AGA (for O.P.1) Mr.S.Pradhan, Advocate (for O.P.2) Petitioner Mr.S.Pradhan, Advocate ….. Vs. Opposite Parties Ms.S.Patnaik, AGA (for O.P.1) Order No. 05. CORAM: JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Decision
ORDER 18.08.2023 (Through hybrid mode) 1. Both the applications have been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceeding in G.R. Case No.1435 of 2018, Page 1 of 5 //2// pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Sambalpur which arises out of Sambalpur Mahila P.S. Case No.33 of 2018 registered for commission of offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 34 of IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act. CRLMC No. 3082 of 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Giridhari Pradhan and Rupei Pradhan. But Rupei Pradhan has not signed the Vakalatnama. So the case is confined to Giridhari Pradhan. CRLMC No.1390 of 2023 has been filed by Bijayalaxmi Ratawa. 2. Giridhari Pradhan is the husband of Bijayalaxmi Ratawa, the informant in Sambalpur Mahila P.S. Case No. 33 of 2018. Rupei Pradhan is the mother and Iswar Pradhan is the brother of Giridhari Pradhan. 3. Learned counsel for husband Giridhari Pradhan and wife Bijayalaxmi Ratawa have submitted that the marriage between the parties had been solemnized on 28.01.2005 at Tarini Mandir, Keonjhar. On account of misunderstanding and difference of opinion, disputes arose between them , for which FIR had been filed by Bijayalaxmi Ratawa leading to registration of Sambalpur Mahila P.S.Case No. 33 of 2018 under Section – 498-A, 323 , 34 IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act against Giridhari Pradhan, his mother Rupei Pradhan and brother Iswar Pradhan. Thereafter on the intervention of their relatives, the dispute has been amicably settled between them for which Bijalaxmi Ratwa does not to proceed with the case. 4. Bijayalaxmi Ratawa has filed CRLMC Bo 1390 of 2023 with prayer to direct the trial court “to quash / dropped the proceeding in connection with G.R.Case No. 1485 of 2018” pending before the learned SDJM Sambalpur. .The prayer is not happily worded , but it is apparent from the averments that the petitioner therein does not want Page 2 of 5 //3// to proceed with G.R. Case No, 1485 of 2018. She has interalia stated in the petition therein that chargesheet in the case has been filed on 17.07.2018. The family members of the complainant and in – laws family, after discussion have settled the dispute and since 15.08.2019, she is staying with her husband and other in laws in their house. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the informant group and accused group have came together and decided to amicably settle the matter. It was realized by both the groups that the incident had happened due to some mis-conception and trivial misunderstanding. The matrimonial dispute having been settled since long, they are staying together with their child. Pendency of this case is causing disturbance in their life . 6. An affidavit sworn to by opposite party No.2-Bijayalaxmi Ratawa has been filed in CRLMC No.3082 of 2023 stating that the matter has been mutually compromised and she does not want to proceed further with the case and has no objection if G.R. Case No.1435/18 of 2018 pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Sambalpur arising out of Mahila P.S. FIR No.0033 of 2018 is quashed. 7. On 01.08.2023, the learned Addl. Government Advocate had been directed to obtain instructions regarding the settlement. She has produced instructions dated 04.08.2023 of the I.I.C Mahila Police Station , Sambalpur where she has reported that ASI Ranjit Nayak had been to village Anugulipada and enquired into the matter. One Sanjay Kumar Singh and Sasmitarani Sahu who stated that they are living together and peacefully in the village and have been blessed with a son. 8. This Court in the case of Bhakta Prasad Swain vs State and another reported in (2023) 91 OCR-762 : 2023 (II) OLR-488: 2023 Page 3 of 5 //4// (II) ILR-CUT-861 has held as follows : “From a perusal of the FIR, it is apparent that the allegations in the FIR are directed against the petitioner only and undoubtedly is a dispute between husband and wife. As they have amicably resolved the dispute and are staying together and opposite party No 2 has submitted that she does not want to proceed against the petitioner, the chances of conviction of the petitioner are bleak. Therefore no useful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending other than burdening the Court with another case which would waste its time and resources. In cases of matrimonial disputes, in order to enable the parties to settle down in life and live peacefully by terminating their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court, it has been the view of the Courts that even if the offences are not compoundable under Section – 320 of the Cr.P.C, the proceedings should be quashed.” 9. After considering the submissions of the counsel , the averments in the petitions and affidavits, report of the IIC , and keeping in mind the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and Others vs. State of Haryana and Another : (2003) 4 SCC 675 , Gian Singh vs State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303, Jitendra Raghuvanshi vs Babita Raghuvanshi : (2013) 4 SCC 58 and this Court in the case of Bhakta Prasad Swain ( supra), I am of the view that this is a fit case for exercise of power under Section – 482 of the Cr.P.C to quash the entire proceedings in proceedings in G.R. Case No.1435 of 2018, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Sambalpur which arises out of Mahila P.S. Case No.33 of 2018 registered under Page 4 of 5 //5// Sections 498-A, 323, 34 of IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act. The proceedings are accordingly quashed. 10. Both the CRLMCs are accordingly allowed. 11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. 12. Copy of this order be sent to the learned S.D.J.M., Sambalpur. Judge (Savitri Ratho) Bichi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BICHITRANANDA SAHOO Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 09-Oct-2023 20:38:37 Page 5 of 5