Rajat Nag Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.3. Perused the case records.

¶16

The present application has been filed by invoking the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the criminal proceeding in Spl. G.R. Case No.11 of 2023 arising out of Baraipoli P.S. Case No.55 of 2023 for commission of offences under Section 376(2)(n)/376(3) of IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act now pending in the file of learned ADJ-cum-Special (POCSO), Sambalpur.

¶17

As per the procedure, upon an allegation a F.I.R. was lodged on 18.03.2023 at 06.45 PM by the complainant, namely, Ramesh Oram. In his complaint, the complainant has alleged that his daughter, namely,

¶18

Page 1 of 4 .

¶19

Arati Oram, aged about 15 years and studying in Class-X, is pregnant. On being asked, the victim revealed that one Rajat Nag, the present petitioner kept physical relationship with her and that she is now 7 months pregnant. It has also been alleged that on 16.06.2023 at about 4 AM, the daughter of the informant suffered abdominal pain and gave birth to a male child. Thereafter, they both were shifted to DHH, Samablpur for further treatment and then, the daughter of the informant was shifted to Burla Medical College. The F.I.R. further reveals that the Informant has alleged that it was the Petitioner who had kept physical relationship with his daughter, therefore, the Petitioner is liable to be punished for the commission of the offences under the alleged sections.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that both the Petitioner and the victim were in a love relationship. During such relationship, they also had physical relationship with consent of both sides, as a result of which the victim got pregnant. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that in the meantime the Petitioner and the victim are married, they are staying together and they have been blessed a male child. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that since the Petitioner and the victim are married and living a happy conjugal life with their son, any further continuance of the present criminal case will cause prejudice to their marital life, will amount to an abuse of the processes of law and that the same would not be in the larger interests of justice.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted that the victim was a minor at the time of occurrence. He further submitted that even if the relationship was consensual, the consent given by any minor is not a consent in the eye of law. On such ground, learned counsel for the State submitted that a case under the alleged sections is well made out against the present Petitioner. Therefore, the application filed by the

¶22

Page 2 of 4 .

¶23

Petitioner is absolutely groundless and the same should be dismissed at the threshold.

¶24

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.3-victim on the other hand supported the contentions raised by learned counsel for the Petitioner. In course of his argument, he further referred to the affidavit filed on 12.04.2024. On perusal of the said affidavit, filed by the victim, it appears that the victim has stated that her age is 19 years and that she has sworn the affidavit before the Oath Commissioner of this Court. The Aadhar Card which has been filed along with affidavit pertaining to the victim reveals that her date of birth is 08.09.2005. On perusal of the affidavit filed by the victim it appears that the dispute has been amicably settled by the intervention of the well-wishers and relatives of the family. Further, it is revealed that the Petitioner has married the victim and they are living a peaceful life. It has also been stated that they have been blessed with a male child, namely, Diwan Nag, aged about one year. Finally, it has been stated that the victim has no objection to the present application filed by the petitioner for quashing of the proceeding.

¶25

Similarly, an affidavit, sworn before Oath Commissioner of this Court, has also been filed by the informant i.e. Ramesh Oram on 12.04.2024. On perusal of the said affidavit it appears that the same is a replica of the affidavit filed by the victim. Therefore, it appears that the informant has no objection in the event the criminal proceeding pending against the present Petitioner is terminated.

¶26

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful consideration of the materials on record as well as taking note of the contentions raised by learned counsel for the informant and the affidavit filed by the victim as well as the informant on 12.04.2024 sworn before the Oath Commissioner of this Court, this

¶27

Page 3 of 4 .

¶28

Court is of the view that the petitioner and the victim have married in the meantime and they have been blessed with a male child, aged about one year. It further appears that both the informant as well as the victim have no objection to the quashing of the proceeding. Further, on a careful scrutiny of the affidavit filed by the victim and the informant it is established that the age of the victim is aged about 19 years. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, further keeping in view the interest of both the victim as well as the Petitioner and the young male child born out of such wedlock, this Court is of the considered view that further continuance of the present proceeding would caused serious prejudice to the victim and the young boy. Moreover, the victim as well as the informant are no more interested in pursuing the litigation. Taking note of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the considered view that further continuance of the present proceeding will amount to abuse of processes of law and the same would be against the interests of justice. Accordingly, this Court deems it proper to quash the criminal proceeding pending against the present Petitioner in the shape of Spl. G.R. Case No.11 of 2023 in the Court of learned ADJ-cum-Special (POCSO), Sambalpur. Accordingly, the same is hereby quashed.

¶29

In such view of the matter, the CRLMC is allowed.

¶30

( A.K. Mohapatra)

¶31

Judge

¶32

Anil

¶33

Page Signature Not Verified 4 of 4 . Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-Jul-2024 11:31:56

Rajat Nag v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajat Nag v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dukhan Giri Vs State of Odisha

Babu@John@Badababu@ Biswabaikunthanatha Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Salila Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Johan Digal Vs State of Orissa

Muralidhar Singh Vs State of Odisha

Babu Swain Vs State of Orissa