Dibya Singh Rout and Another vs State of Orissa and Another

B.K. Nayak, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the leaned Standing Counsel for opposite party No. 1. None appears on behalf of opposite party No. 2 when the matter is called.

On consent of the parties, this CRLMC is disposed of at the stage of admission.

In this application u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure the petitioners pray for quashing of the F.I.R. lodged by opposite party No. 2 on the basis of which Kendrapara P.S. Case No. 35(8) of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 216 of 2010 of the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Kendrapara has been registered.

Petitioner No. 2 is the daughter of the informant-opposite party No. 2 who lodged the aforesaid F.I.R. on the allegation that petitioner No. 1 kidnapped petitioner No. 2 when she had gone to attend her class in the C.T. School at Kendrapara.

In this application, it has been averred that both the petitioners were class mates while prosecuting their +3 Arts course in the College and they fell in love and decided to marry after completion of their studies. The informant who was not in favour of the alliance between petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 arranged marriage of petitioner No. 2 elsewhere for which petitioner No. 2 on her own volition compelled petitioner No. 1 to marry her and accordingly she eloped with petitioner No. 1 and in the meantime both of them got married on 09.03.2010. Since the date of the marriage they have been staying together happily leading their conjugal life. It is further stated that petitioner No. 2 is a major girl and she on her own volition eloped with the petitioner No. 1, who is a major one. Therefore, no offence has been committed by petitioner No. 1 and that the F.I.R. has been lodged by opposite party No. 2 i.e., father of petitioner No. 2, on false allegations with mala fide intention in order to harass petitioner No. 1. This application filed u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure is supported by affidavit of petitioner No. 2.

It transpires that opposite party No. 2-informant filed W.P. (Crl.) No. 251 of 2010 in this Court on 02.04.2010 praying for issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus on the allegation that the petitioner No. 2 was kidnapped. It appears from the order passed in the said writ application that petitioner No. 2 along with her husband (petitioner No. 1) appeared before this Court and on being questioned, she refused to accompany her father. Accordingly the aforesaid writ application was dismissed.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that continuance of the investigation and the criminal proceeding in the aforesaid case amounts to an abuse of process of Court and would not be in the interest of justice, particularly when the F.I.R. has been lodged on false allegation with mala fide intention. Learned Counsel for the petitioners in this connection relies on a decision of this Court in the case of Surajit Patra and Anr. v. state of Orissa (2003) 25 OCR 660 : 2003 (Supp.) OLR 953 (NOC).

After going through the said decision, it is found that the facts of that case are exactly similar to that of the present case. In that case, it was held that continuance of the criminal proceeding would not only cause a dent in their blissful marriage life, but will also ultimately prejudice all the parties and will amount to abuse of the process of law. On coming to such conclusion this Court relied on the ratio of the decision of the Apex Court in Fazle Gaffar Khan v. State of W.B. 2000 SCC (Cri.) 686.

Considering the facts of the present case and the ratio laid down in the aforesaid cases, I am of the firm view that continuance of the criminal proceeding arising out of the F.I.R. lodged by opposite party No. 2 would not be in the interest of justice, on the contrary it would amount to an abuse of process of law since it is amply clear that no offence has been made out in view of the assertions of petitioner No. 2 before this Court.

Hence Kendrapara P.S. Case No. 35 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 216 of 2010 pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Kendrapara is quashed.

Crl. Misc. Case is accordingly allowed.

Issue urgent certified copy.