Quashed

Sankar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Apr 2024CRLMC/158/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa quashed an FIR registered under Sections 498A, 294, 506, 34 of the IPC and Section 4 of the DP Act. The court observed that the complainant, the wife, had filed an affidavit stating that she did not wish to proceed due to settlement of the difference and resumption of marital life.

What did the court decide?

The FIR, i.e., Jatni P.S. Case No.475 of 2015 and consequential proceedings qua the petitioners are quashed. The CRLMC is disposed of.

Sankar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Dowry and Cruelty | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.158 of 2024

¶3

Sankar Pradhan & others …. Petitioners

¶4

Mr. P.K. Nayak, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & another …. Opp. Parties

¶7

Mr. S.R. Roul, Additional Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order

No.

ORDER

09.04.2024

1 . Mr. D. Mohapatra, learned counsel enters appearance on behalf of the opposite party no.2 by filing Vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record.

¶16

2. Heard.

¶17

3. At the instance of the opposite party no.2, the F.I.R., i.e., Jatni P.S. Case No.475 of 2015 came to be registered against the petitioners under Sections 498A/294/506/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Jatni.

¶18

4. The opposite party no.2 is the wife of petitioner no.4. The F.I.R. was registered by opposite party no.2

¶19

due to matrimonial discord. Now the parties have settled their dispute and decided to revive their marital life. The petitioner no.4 and opposite party no.2 are staying happily as husband and wife.

¶20

5. The petitioner no.4 and opposite party no.2 are present in person along with their respective counsel and filed their self attested photocopies of their respective Adhar Cards to establishment their identity. The same are taken on record.

¶21

Opposite party no.2 has filed an affidavit dated 09.04.2024 inter alia stating that due to misunderstanding, the F.I.R. was registered against the petitioners by her and now since the petitioners have decided to revive their marital life, she does not want to proceed further against the petitioners.

¶22

6. Mr. Roul, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that since the dispute is essentially matrimonial one and now the parties have revive their relationship, no fruitful purpose would serve to continue with the prosecution against the petitioners. Hence, in the absence of any legal impediment, this Court can give indulgence to the petitioners.

¶23

8. Taking into consideration the aforementioned fact and submission at bar, the F.I.R., i.e., Jatni P.S. Case No.475 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Cuttack and the consequential proceedings

¶24

arising therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed.

¶25

9. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶27

amit

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 12-Apr-2024 09:43:16

Sankar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jatia Meher Vs State

Sunil Kumar Routray Vs Uttarani Shoe Store

Padmabati Dash Vs Mukundadev Acharya

Narasimhamurty Panigrahi Vs Saroj Kumar Panda

Kuna@Sri Rama Krushna Jena Vs State of Odisha

Padma Charan Parida @ Padmalochan Parida Vs State of Odisha