The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3588 of 2025 Birendra Samal @ Khandei ..... Petitioner State Of Odisha & Anr. -versus- ..... Represented By Adv. - Rituranjan Chhotaray Opp. Parties Represented By Adv. – S.K. Parhi, A.S.C. Rakesh Kumar Mallick, (For O.P. No.2)
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 01.12.2025 05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and learned counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. The accused-petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C to invoke the inherent power of this Court to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Banki P.S Case No.283 of 2012 which corresponds to G.R Case No.386 of 2012, the same corresponds to S.T Case No.13 of 2013 pending before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Banki. Page 1 of 5. 4. The abovenoted Banki P.S case was registered for alleged commission of an offence punishable under Sections 363, 364-A, 506 and 294 of IPC on the basis of a complaint lodged on 15.12.2012 at the instance of the father of the victim, namely, Sikhar Pradhan. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that although the abovenoted case was registered at the instance of the father of the victim, however, the Petitioner and the victim have married in the meantime and are leading a happy conjugal life for more than a decade. He further contended that the victim does not want to proceed further in the present criminal case and further continuance of such proceeding would cause unnecessary disruption of their otherwise happy and peaceful marital life. He also contended that in the meantime they have been blessed with two children. The male child is aged about 11 years and the female child is aged about 8 years. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that further continuance of the present criminal proceeding would not serve the ends of the justice. As such, the same should be quashed allowing the Petitioner and the victim to continue their happy marital life. 6. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 on the other hand supported the contentions raised by learned counsel for the Petitioner. He further submitted that both the Petitioner and the victim were in a love relationship. Therefore, they fled away and eventually they got married. It was further submitted that they have been married for more than a decade at this point and in the meantime they have been blessed with two children. He further submitted that the informant, who happens to be the father of the Page 2 of 5. victim, has expired in the meantime. Accordingly, a joint affidavit has been filed at the instance of the accused-petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2. By referring to the joint affidavit which was sworn before the Oath Commissioner of this Court on 11.09.2025, learned counsel for the victim contended that the Petitioner and the victim are staying together and leading a happy conjugal life along with their two children. Therefore, the further continuance of the present criminal proceeding would not serve the ends of justice. He further submitted that the victim does not have any objection in the event the entire criminal proceeding against the Petitioner is quashed. 7. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand produced a copy of the instruction received from the IIC, Banki PS dated 30.10.2025. On perusal of the instruction of the IIC, Banki PS it appears that the concerned IIC conducted a field enquiry and ascertained that the accused-petitioner and the victim are indeed staying together along with their family and maintaining a happy conjugal life in their village, namely, Veda Ramachandrapur. It has also been stated that they have been blessed with one male child, namely, Subham Samal, aged about 11 years and one female child, namely, Subhasmita Samal, aged about 8 years. It has also been stated in the report that all the family members are living happily under one roof and nothing adverse was found against them. In view of the aforesaid report of the IIC, Banki PS, learned counsel for the State contended that he will have no objection in the event this Court passes any appropriate order keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner Page 3 of 5. produced a copy of the deposition of the victim recorded during trial pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 30.10.2025. The victim, who was examined as P.W.3, has categorically stated in her deposition that she was in a love relationship with the Petitioner since her school days. Due to a misunderstanding, the father of the victim had lodged the F.I.R. Subsequently after lodging of the F.I.R, the Petitioner has married the victim and they are staying together as husband and wife and they have been blessed with two children. She has also stated that she was produced before the learned Magistrate for recording for statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C which was duly recorded and signed by her. In her cross-examination, she has reiterated what she had stated in her examination and no contradictory material has been extracted from the victim in her cross-examination. 9. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the factual background of the present case, further taking note of the deposition of the victim recorded during trial and the report of the IIC, Banki PS dated 30.10.2025 which was produced before this Court by the learned counsel for the state, this Court is of the considered view that both the Petitioner and the victim are married since long and they have been staying together as husband and wife and leading a happy conjugal life and in the meantime they have been blessed with two kids as has been indicated hereinabove. In view of the aforesaid development, this Court is of the view that further continuance of the present case would cause disruption in their otherwise happy marital life and that continuance of such proceeding would not be in the larger interest Page 4 of 5. of justice. Taking into consideration the fact that the occurrence is of the year 2012 and that the accused-petitioner and the victim are married and leading a happy conjugal life for more than a decade at this point and further taking note of the deposition of the victim in this case, this Court is of the view that ultimate chance of conviction in the present case is very bleak. Moreover, in the event the case is sent for trial, the same would cause wastage of valuable time of judiciary. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that the present case is a fit case where this Court can exercise its inherent powers to bring an end to the trial. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding arising out of Banki P.S Case No.283 of 2012, which corresponds to G.R Case No.386 of 2012, and to the S.T Case No.13 of 2013 pending before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Banki is hereby quashed. 10. Accordingly, the CRLMC application stands allowed. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. Anil ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Page 5 of 5. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 02-Dec-2025 14:21:57