The High Court · 2024
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.1880 of 2024 1) Susanta Kumar Sahoo 2) Raj Kishore Sahoo 3) Prasanta Kumar Sahoo 4) Anjali Sahoo 1) State Of Odisha 2) Gayatri Sahoo ..... Petitioners Represented By Adv. – Mr. Manas Kumar Chand -versus- ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. –
Legal Reasoning
Mr. A.P. Das, A.S.C. Mr. Mohammad Avram, Advocate for the Informant CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 19.07.2024 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed at the instance of the Petitioners with a prayer to quash the entire criminal prosecution launched against them vide Berhampur Mahila P.S. Case No.101 of 2019, corresponding to G.R. Case No.1745 of 2019, pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners, the learned Page 1 of 5. Order No. 02. counsel for the Opposite Parties No.2-Informant and the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Party No.1. Perused the records as well as the affidavit filed by the Opposite Party No.2-Informant. 4. The Petitioner No.1 is the husband of the Opposite Party No.2 and Petitioners No.2 to 4 are the family members of Petitioner No.1. 5. It appears that initially F.I.R. was lodged against the Petitioners under Sections 498-A/494/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. However, after completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed against the Petitioners and pursuant thereto the learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur vide order dated 03.03.2020 has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 498-A/494/406/506/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against Petitioner No.1 and under Sections 498-A/406/506/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against Petitioners No.2 to 4. 6. Mr. Manas Chand, learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2, at the outset, submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and pursuant to the aforesaid settlement, the marriage between the Petitioner No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 is to be dissolved subject to the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties. One of the conditions as pointed out Page 2 of 5. at the Bar is that Petitioner No.1 shall pay permanent alimony of Rs.15 Lakhs to the Opposite Party No.2. 7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the aforesaid amount has already been deposited with the registry of this Court and the same is subject matter of MATA No.8 of 2021. He further contended that due to pendency of the present proceeding, the MATA No.8 of 2021 has not been finalized. Since the matter has been settled on compromise between the parties and it has been agreed to withdraw all the proceedings pending against each other, learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that in the larger interest of justice all pending proceedings, including the present criminal case, be terminated at the earliest. It is more so keeping in view the interest of the parties involved in the present case. 8. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2, on the other hand, contended that the Opposite Party No.2 has filed an affidavit dated 20th June 2024, which has been sworn before the Oath Commissioner of this Court. On perusal of the said affidavit, it appears that the Opposite Party No.2 does not want to pursue this criminal case any further subject to the settlement arrived at between the parties. In paragraph-2 of the affidavit, she has categorically stated that she is ready to settle the matter on receipt of a permanent alimony of Rs.15 lakhs and that the said amount has already been deposited before this Court. It has also been stated that due to pendency of the present case, the Opposite Party No.2 is unable to receive the aforesaid amount. Page 3 of 5. The affidavit further reveals that pursuant to the settlement, all other proceedings except the present case have already been withdrawn and details of such other proceedings has also been provided in paragraph-3 of the affidavit. 9. The present matter has arisen out of G.R. Case No.1745 of 2019 which is pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur. In paragraph-4 of the affidavit dated 20.06.2024, the Opposite Party No.2 has categorically stated that she does not want to continue with the aforesaid noted G.R. Case pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur and further wants to withdraw the said proceeding in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 10. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submitted that since the parties have arrived at a settlement and the permanent alimony amount as agreed between the parties has already been deposited before this Court in the above noted MATA case, he has no objection to the termination of the G.R. Case No.1745 of 2019. 11. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the developments that had taken place during the pendency of the present proceeding and the fact that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties subject to payment of permanent alimony of Rs.15 lakhs, this Court is of the view that further continuance of the aforesaid proceeding will be an abuse Page 4 of 5. of the process of law. 12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court in the larger interest of justice, is inclined to quash the entire criminal proceeding. 13. Accordingly, the Criminal Misc. Case is allowed. Consequently, the prosecution case launched against the Petitioners vide G.R. Case No.1745 of 2019 on the file of learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur stands quashed. The learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur or the Court in seisin over the matter shall on receipt of the copy of this order/production of the copy of this order, drop the proceeding in the aforesaid case in compliance of this order. 14. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the CRLMC is disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 22-Jul-2024 12:04:26 Page 5 of 5.