Rohitas Behera Vs State of Odisha

Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Informant-wife and learned counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.

¶16

The present application has been filed at the instance of the accused-husband in G.R. Case No.197 of 2024 pending in the file of learned SDJM(S), Cuttack which was registered on the basis of an FIR lodged before the Mahila P.S. on 23.03.2024 at the instance of the Opposite Party No.2 alleging commission of an offence punishable under Sections 498-A/307/506/34 of IPC read

¶17

Page 1 of 5.

¶18

with Section 4 of D.P. Act, for quashing the entire criminal proceeding.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the present Petitioner is the husband and the Opposite Party No.2 is the wife. He further submitted that the both got married on 06.07.2022 as per the Hindu Rights and Customs. However, due to lack of compatibility they could not stay together for long time. Accordingly, there was a defence of opinion between the two which led to initiation of different proceedings before different forums. The present case is one such proceeding which was initiated at the instance of the Opposite Party No.2 informant-wife alleging dowry torture against the accused Petitioner-husband.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that in the meantime the matter has been amicably resolved with the intervention of the relatives and family members of both sides. Pursuant to the aforesaid compromise the parties had agreed to approach the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack by filing an application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for a decree of divorce on mutual consent. In course of hearing, a certified copy of the judgment passed by the learned Judge, Family Court in C.P. No.143 of 2024 was produced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. On perusal of the judgment dated 20.07.2024 this Court observed that the learned Judge, Family Court has already granted a decree of divorce on mutual consent to the Petitioner-husband and the Opposite Party No. 2-wife subject to the terms and conditions mentioned therein.

¶21

Page 2 of 5.

¶22

Therefore there was no doubt that they have been judicially separated by virtue of decree of divorce granted on mutual consent. On the aforesaid subsequent development, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that both the parties have agreed to all the pending litigations and accordingly, the Petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of the present criminal proceeding.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the Informant Opposite Party No.2-wife on the other hand supported the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. He also affirmed the fact that the marriage has been dissolved on mutual consent by virtue of the judgment in decree dated 20.07.2024 passed in Civil Proceeding No.143 of 2024 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack. On such ground learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 contended that the Opposite Party No.2-wife was no longer interested to pursue the present criminal litigation against the Petitioner.

¶24

Accordingly, learned counsel for the Opp. Party No.2 contended that the Opp. Party No.2 will have no objection in the event and the entire proceeding is quashed against the Petitioner.

¶25

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted that although he has no instruction, however further referring to the judgment passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack he contended that it appears that the parties have been separated by a decree of divorce on mutual consent. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that he will have

¶26

Page 3 of 5.

¶27

no objection in the event this Court passes any order which is required to secure the ends of justice.

¶28

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, further taking note of the subsequent development as well as the judgment dated 20.07.2024 passed in CP No.143 of 2024 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack whereby a decree of divorce has been granted to the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 on mutual consent, further taking note of the submission made on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2, this Court is of the view that the Parties have been separated lawfully. Moreover, it appears that the Informant-Opposite Party No.2-wife is no longer interested in the present criminal proceeding.

¶29

In view of the aforesaid development, this Court is of the considered view that the further continuation of the present proceeding would be an abuse of the process of law. In the aforesaid factual background, this Court is also of the view that the present case is a fit case for this Court to exercise its inherent powers to bring an end to the pending criminal litigation, to secure the ends of justice and to protect the parties from unnecessary harassment by being forced to repeatedly approaching this Court. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to quash the entire criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.197 of 2024 arising out of Mahila P.S. Case No.51 of 2024 by the learned S.D.J.M(S), Cuttack.

¶30

Page 4 of 5.

¶31

Accordingly, the CRLMC stands allowed.

¶32

( A.K. Mohapatra)

¶33

Judge

¶34

Sisir

¶35

Signature Not Verified

¶36

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 24-Nov-2025 15:41:29

¶37

Page 5 of 5.

Rohitas Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohitas Behera 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

Pradeep Raj Karat Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

Krupasindhu Panda Vs State of Odisha

Ramya Ranjan Parida Vs State of Odisha

State of Orissa Vs Purussotam Bindhani

Ashutosh Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Tirtha Sahu@Godru@Godra Vs State of Odisha