Allowed¶29

Dr. Pramod Kumar Khara v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC7 Jan 2026CRLMC/4310/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of a Sections 498-A/323/294/506/34 IPC matrimonial cruelty case under section 482 Cr.P.C after mutual-consent divorce under Section 13B Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (C.P. No.491 of 2024, Family Court, Cuttack, judgment dated 10.12.2025) and the wife's receipt of Rs.24,50,000/- permanent alimony; informant's affidavit (05.12.2025) of no-objection; State concurred; G.R Case No.972 of 2018 / Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018 (SDJM, Koraput) quashed; CRLMC No.4310 of 2025 allowed.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in G.R Case No.972 of 2018 (Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018) pending before the learned SDJM, Koraput. ¶29

Dr. Pramod Kumar Khara Vs State of Odisha — Matrimonial and Divorce | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in G.R Case No.972 of 2018 (Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018) pending before the learned SDJM, Koraput.

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceeding in G.R Case No.972 of 2018 (Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018) under Sections 498-A, 323, 294, 506 & 34 IPC pending before the learned SDJM, Koraput should be quashed, given the dissolution of the Petitioner's marriage by a mutual-consent divorce decree, the informant-wife's receipt of the full permanent alimony, and her no-objection to quashing.

¶20

Court's answer

The dispute between the Petitioner and Opposite Party No.2, being matrimonial in nature, has come to an end with the grant of the decree of divorce, and the permanent alimony amount has already been received by the Opposite Party No.2.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

Since the Opposite Party No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding, the present case is a fit case where the Court should exercise its inherent power to bring an end to the criminal litigation between the parties.

¶25

Key takeaways

The entire criminal proceeding in G.R Case No.972 of 2018 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Koraput, corresponding to Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018, is quashed.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Matrimonial cruelty proceeding (Sections 498-A, 323, 294, 506 & 34 IPC) in G.R Case No.972 of 2018 / Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018 before the learned SDJM, Koraput was quashed in exercise of the Court's inherent power under section 482 of the Cr.P.C: the petitioner-husband and the informant-wife had been divorced by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (C.P. No.491 of 2024, Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, judgment dated 10.12.2025) subject to permanent alimony of Rs.24,50,000/-, which the wife had received (per her affidavit dated 05.12.2025) and on receipt of which she had no objection to quashing; the State counsel likewise raised no objection. Holding the matrimonial dispute to have come to an end, the Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding and the CRLMC application was allowed.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.4310 of 2025

¶2

Dr. Pramod Kumar Khara

¶3

..... Petitioner

¶4

Represented by Adv. - Alok Kumar Panda

¶5

-versus-

¶6

1) State Of Odisha ..... Opp. Parties

¶7

Kabita Panda Represented by Adv. – S.K. Parhi, A.S.C. Supriya Patra, Adv. for O.P. No.2

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR

MOHAPATRA

ORDER

07.01.2026

Order No.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the InformantOpposite Party No.2. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.

¶16

By filing the present application under section 482 of the Cr.P.C the Petitioner seeks quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in G.R Case No.972 of 2018 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Koraput which corresponds to Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018. Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018 was registered at the instance of the informant-wife on the allegation of commission of an offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323,

¶17

Page 1 of 4.

¶18

294, 506 & 34 IPC.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that due to a matrimonial discord between the Petitioner-husband and the Opposite Party No.2-wife, the Opposite Party No.2-wife as informant has lodged the present case. He further submitted that in the meantime they have been separated by grant of a mutual decree of divorce. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner filed a certified copy of the judgment dated 10.12.2025 passed in C.P. No.491 of 2024 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack.

¶20

On perusal of the judgment it appears that the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack has been pleased to grant a decree of divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and, accordingly, the marriage has been dissolved. The decree of divorce granted by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack reveals that the marriage has been dissolved on mutual consent subject to payment of permanent alimony of Rs.24,50,000/- (Rupees twenty four lakh fifty thousand) by the Petitioner to the Opposite Party No.2-wife. Learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.2wife did not dispute the receipt of the aforesaid permanent alimony amount. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the present criminal case be terminated in the larger interest of justice and to save the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 further harassment.

¶21

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2-wife supported the submissions made by learned counsel for the Petitioner. In course of her argument, she referred to the affidavit filed by the

¶22

Page 2 of 4.

¶23

Opposite Party No.2 which was sworn before the Oath Commissioner of this Court dated 05.12.2025. On perusal of the affidavit, this Court observes that the Opposite Party No.2-wife has categorically mentioned about the grant of decree of divorce on mutual consent. It has also been indicated that the criminal case shall be withdrawn after disposal of the divorce proceeding. In para-10 of the affidavit, it has been categorically mentioned that the entire permanent alimony amount has been received by the Opposite Party No.2 and in the subsequent paragraphs she has categorically stated that she will have no objection in the event the criminal proceeding is quashed.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that he will have no objection in the event this Court passes any order to secure the ends of justice taking into consideration the subsequent developments in this case.

¶25

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties, on a careful consideration of the mutual decree of divorce a certified copy of which was filed in court today, and on a careful appraisal of the affidavit filed by the Opposite Party No.2 on 05.12.2025, this Court has no hesitation in coming to a conclusion that the dispute between the Petitioner and Opposite Party No.2, which is matrimonial in nature, has come to an end with the grant of decree of divorce and that the permanent alimony amount has already been received by the Opposite Party No.2. Moreover, since the Opposite Party No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding, this Court is of the view that the present case is a fit case where this Court should exercise its inherent power to bring an end to the criminal litigation

¶26

Page 3 of 4.

¶27

Anil

¶28

between the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2. Accordingly, this Court quashes the entire criminal proceeding in G.R Case No.972 of 2018 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Koraput which corresponds to Koraput Town P.S Case No.191 of 2018.

¶29

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the CRLMC application stands allowed.

¶30

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)

¶31

Judge

¶32

Page 4 of 4.

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Jan-2026 19:12:13

Dr. Pramod Kumar Khara v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Pramod Kumar Khara 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

Pintu @ Subhasish Rout Vs State of Odisha

Manoj Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha

Urmila Mahanand Vs State of Odisha

Indumati Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Jiban Krushna Karan Vs State of Odisha

Dinabandhu Bisoi Vs State of Odisha