Allowed

Kuna Gochhayat v. State

Orissa HC29 Jul 2022CRLMC/5868/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings. Noting that the parties were married in May 2013, were living together, and had a male child born in 2014, the court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to quash the case to serve the interest of justice. The court relied on the Supreme Court's principles regarding matrimonial disputes to allow

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.942 of 2013 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Angul is hereby quashed.

Kuna Gochhayat Vs State — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.5868 of 2014

¶3

Kuna Gochhayat

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. P.S. Nayak, Advocate

-Versus-

Order No.

State of Odisha and others

¶10

…. Opposite Parties Mr. S.N. Das, ASC

¶11

CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK ORDER 29.07.2022

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C filed by the petitioner for quashing of the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.942 of 2013 arising out of Jarapada P.S. Case No.73 of 2013 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Angul.

¶14

In compliance of the Court’s order dated 15^th July, 2022, the parties, namely, petitioner and opposite party No.2 have appeared in person and the victim, namely, opposite party No.2 filed an affidavit by stating that she has married the petitioner on 22^nd May, 2013 and they are blessed with a male child. In support of such claim by opposite party No.2 that the child is born to them, a birth certificate (Annexure-B) has been produced and the same is perused by the Court.

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

In view of the presence of the parties and filling of an affidavit and considering the fact that they have married and living together since 2013 and blessed with a child in the year 2014, the Court is of the view that the criminal proceeding which is pending before the court below should be quashed in the interest of justice.

¶17

In fact, the Supreme Court time and again reiterated the principles for quashing of criminal proceedings in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. whereby, it has been held and observed that offences which are non-compoundable in nature but disputes between parties essentially arises out of civil or matrimonial or similar nature of litigations, such jurisdiction may be exercised depending on the facts and circumstances of each particular case. Being alive to the above settled position of law laid down in plethora of decisions and more prominently in the judgment of B.S. Joshi and others Vrs. State of Haryana and another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, the Court is of the opinion that the present case is one of such kind where inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is required to be exercised having regard to the fact that the parties are married and settled in life and leading a happy and peaceful conjugal life.

¶18

Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶19

In the result, the CRLMC stands allowed. Consequently, the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.942 of 2013 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Angul is hereby quashed.

¶20

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶21

TUDU

¶22

Page 2 of 2

Kuna Gochhayat v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuna Gochhayat v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umashankar Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Pintu Routa@Pintu Rout Vs State of Orissa

Pratima Mishra Vs Republic of India

Pramila Mallik Vs State

Shivadutta Naik Vs State of Orissa

Gandhia Mallik@Rajendra Malik Vs State of Orissa