The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3956 of 2022 Deepak Kumar Pradhan @ Dipak Pradhan and others …. Petitioner(s) Mr. D. Nayak, Senior Advocate along with Mr. B. K. Das, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and another …. Opposite Party(s)
Legal Reasoning
Mr. S. J. Mohanty, ASC Mr. S. N. Biswal, Advocate for O.P. No.2 CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Decision
ORDER 26.11.2024 Heard. The petitioners are the accused in the F.I.R. dated Order No. 05. 1. 2. 22.10.2020 in Badambadi P.S. Case No.218 of 2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 294/323/370(4)/34 of I.P.C. read with Section 14 of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 22.10.2020, the informant being the coordinator of the Childline, Cuttack lodged an F.I.R. before the I.I.C., Badambadi P.S. alleging therein that on Page 1 of 6 17.10.2020, a lady without giving her identity informed on telephone that the petitioner No.1 has illegally kept a 13 years minor girl and engaged her in his household work as child labour and abused and tortured her. It is also alleged that the petitioner No.1 did not give proper food to the minor girl. On 19.10.2020, the said lady informed about the place where the minor girl was stayed to the informant. Thereafter, with the help of the police staff, the informant rescued the minor girl from Saktinagar and produced her before the District Child Welfare Committee, Cuttack for recording of her statement. Hence, the F.I.R. 4. Notice was issued to the opposite party No.2 on 06.01.2023. Pursuance thereto, Mr. Biswal, learned counsel entered appearance and files Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party No.2. 5. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. The learned trial Court vide order dated 23.12.2021 has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Section 370(4)/34 of I.P.C. read with Section 14 of the Child Labour Prohibition Act and Section 3(1)(h)/3(2)(v)(va) of the SC & ST (PoA) Act against the petitioners. Before the trial commenced, the parties have entered into a settlement. The petitioners have filed the Page 2 of 6 present petition seeking quashing of the criminal proceeding initiated against them. 6. The petitioners, the opposite party No.2 and the victim are present in the 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. 7. The parties have filed a joint affidavit dated 26.11.2024 inter alia stating as under:- <3. That, Ratana Juanga @ Ratanakar (O.P No.2) the father guardian of my Kumari Jamuna Juanga who is minor aged about 17 years old. She has never been used as Child Labour or domestic help in the house of Deepak Kumar Pradhan at any point of time. He along with their family members are very honest and gentlemen, they used to help me and my family member at the time of need. Deepak Kumar Pradhan and his family member have never engaged my daughter in their house hold works. 4. That, Ratana Juanga @ Ratanakar (O.P No.2) had been looking after the cattle in the house of petitioner No. 1 (Deepak Kumar Pradhan @ Dipak Pradhan) for last 5 years. Since they had sold out their cattle, O.P No.2 had been to his own village. In the month of July, 2020 O.P. No.2 and his younger daughter namely Jamuna Juanga went to the house of the Petitioner to invite for the marriage ceremony of my elder daughter. Due to lock down and shut down was imposed due to COVID-19 pandemic, O.P No.2 could not take his minor daughter Jamuna Jaunga with me to my village. 5. That since the family members of Deepak Kumar Pradhan have helped so many times at the time of Page 3 of 6 need, the wife of O.P No.2 and O.P No.2 had decided to invite them to the marriage ceremony. So in the month of July, 2020 O.P No.2 went to the house of Petitioner no. 1 with his younger daughter Jamuna Juanga to invite for the marriage ceremony of his elder daughter. As the birthday ceremony of the daughter of Petitioner no.1 was about to celebrated, on their request and due to willingness of daughter of O.P No.2, O.P No.2 left her to their house for few days. 6. That due to restriction on account of COVID-19 the transportations have been stopped for which O.P No.2 could not bring back his daughter from the house of petitioner no.1. During such period petitioner no.1 was diagnosis COVID-19 positive and he was undergoing treatment in the hospital. The daughter od O.P No.2 and their family members were staying in their house in isolation at the in- law's house of petitioner no.1 at Shakti Nagar, Cuttack. 7. That O.P No.2 with his wife came to Cuttack to bring their daughter and to see the health of petitioner no.1. On 19.10.2020 O.P No.2 came to know the Child Welfare Committee, Cuttack along with IIC, Badambadi P.S. forcibly took his daughter from the in-law's house of petitioner no.1 with allegation that the alleged victim Jamuna was used as Child Labour in their house. 8. That on 21.10.2020 and 22.10.2020, the O.P No.2 has approached before Chairman CWC, Cuttack and IIC, Badambadi P.S. respectively to handover his minor daughter to him. On 06.01.2021 the late wife of O.P No.2 namely Rukumani Juanga had filed an application to the Collector, Cuttack to hand over alleged Jamuna to them. 9. That now the alleged victim(Jamuna Juanga) is staying with her father O.P No.2. The alleged victim and the O.P No.2 have no objection and grievance against all petitioners for anything. Petitioner no.3 has never requested to O.P No.2 to let Jamuna in the house of petitioner no.1 to do house hold work. Page 4 of 6 10. That, it is humbly submitted that due to misrepresentation and miss- communication, the FIR has been lodged by the Co-ordinator Child Line, Basundhara, Cuttack, against the petitioners and after receiving false information vide Badambadi P.S. Case No.218 of 2020 has been instituted. The minor daughter of O.P No.2 and O.P No.2 being the father guardian do not want to proceed with the C.T. case No.170 of 2020 pending before the learned Court of SC & ST (Special Court), Cuttack arising out of Badambadi P.S. Case No.218 of 2020. 11. That, O.P No.2 and his daughter have no objection and would not be prejudiced if the above criminal proceeding is quashed as against the petitioners, as the alleged victim has never worked in the house of the petitioner No. 1 & 2 at any point of time. On 02.11.2021 the O.P No.2 and his daughter Jamuna Juanga appeared before Learned Court SC & ST (Special Court), Cuttack in the C.T. case No.170 of 2020 in view of summons received from the court and filed affidavit. If the trial will continue the petitioner as well as the O.P No.2 and his minor daughter will be humiliated and harassed.= 8. Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State submits that since the parties have settled their dispute and filed an exhaustive joint affidavit and the opposite party No.2 joins with the petitioners making the prayer for quashing of the criminal prosecution, therefore, there is no legal impediment in quashing the F.I.R. 9. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have settled their dispute and keeping in view the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Page 5 of 6 another reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 and B.S. Joshi & others vs. State of Haryana & another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, I am of the considered view that subjecting the petitioners to trial would be a futile exercise. Therefore, the petition deserves merit. 10. Accordingly, the cognizance order dated 23.12.2021 passed by the learned SC & ST Special Court, Cuttack in connection with C.T. Case No.170 of 2020 arising out of Badambadi P.S. Case No.218 of 2020 and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed, subject to each of the petitioners paying cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) to the victim. 11. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Swarna Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-Nov-2024 11:11:09 Page 6 of 6