This was a writ petition which became infructuous as the records showed the petitioner had voluntarily left for Delhi, married, and was living there, causing the proceeding to end.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WPCRL No.47 of 2021
Nityanand Manna ..……. Petitioner
Mr. Prasanta Kumar Nayak, Adv.
-Versus-
State of Odisha & others ..…….. Opp. Parties
Mr. S.S. Kanungo, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
ORDER
22.07.2022
Order No.
08. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/
Physical Mode).
2. Mr. S.S. Kanungo, learned Addl. Government Advocate
appearing for the State has produced a written instruction that he has
received from I.I.C., Marine Police Station, Jamboo, District-
Kendrapara. From the said instruction as well as from the statements
recorded under Sections 161 of the Cr.P.C. and 164 of the Cr.P.C., it
transpires that the victim is a major and she had left the house
voluntarily and stayed at Delhi with his relation. During the stay, in
Delhi, she was given in marriage and according to her, in presence of
her parents. Presently, she is living with her husband, namely Mr.
M.R. Mandal at Delhi.
2
3. Mr. P.K. Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has not contradicted any of the above facts, as recorded by us.
4. In view of this, this proceeding has become infructuous and accordingly, the same is disposed of as infructuous.
(S. Talapatra) Judge
(M.S. Sahoo) Judge
Subhasis
3
4
Nityanand Manna
State of Odisha
S. Talapatra
M.S. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
