Orissa High Court
Mahendra Kumar Behera vs State Of Odisha & Another …. Opp. … on 11 April, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.783 of 2025
Mahendra Kumar Behera .... Petitioner
Mr. Umesh
Chandra
Mohanty,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opp. Parties
Mr.Bibekananda
Nayak, AGA &
Mrs. Sarita
Maharana, ASC
& Mr. Ajit
Kumar
Mohanty,
Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order ORDER
No. 11.04.2025
04.
1.
Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the
F.I.R. in connection with Sorada P.S. Case No.81 of
2019 corresponding to G.R. Case No.169 of 2019 came
to be registered against the petitioner for the alleged
commission of offences punishable under Sections
493/417/109/294/323/506/34 of the IPC, pending in
Page 1 of 6
the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Sorada.
3. The opposite party No.2 reported to pilice alleging
therein that, the present petitioner on the pretext of
marrying her, kept relationship with her. On
15.05.2019, at about 3.30 A.M., she came out from
her house with the accused Mahabahu @ Muria
Behera (brother of the present petitioner) and
Dharmendra Baliarsingh (nephew of the present
petitioner). They took her to some place. The petitioner
kept her in a house of his relative and forcibly raped
her giving assurance of marriage. Then both of them
lived together and kept physical relationship several
times. On 20.05.2019 the petitioner left the victim at
the house of his relative and did not return. On
21.05.2019, she reached at Sorada. The informant
went to the house of the petitioner and on his query,
the mother of Nalita abused the informant in obscene
language and assaulted her by means of kick and fist
blows and threatened her with dire consequences.
Hence, the F.I.R is registered.
4. After the investigation, the charge sheet has been
filed in the present case on 30.11.2021 for the alleged
commission of the offences punishable under Sections
366/376(2)(n) of the IPC.
5. During the investigation, the statement of the
victim was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C.
The learned State Counsel has placed on record the
statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of
Page 2 of 6
the Cr. P.C. Reading of the entire evidence reveals that
the petitioner and the opposite party No.2 were in
relationship. They were meeting regularly. The
petitioner, on the promise of getting married with her,
had kept relationship with her. When the villagers
came to know about this, the F.I.R. has been filed
against the petitioner.
6. After the charge sheet is filed, the learned trial
Court has taken cognizance of the offence. However,
charges have not yet been framed as yet and the trial
has not been commenced. At this stage, the parties
have entered into settlement on the intervention of the
village gentries and the well-wishers. On the basis of
the said settlement terms, the present petitioner has
been filed for quashing of the proceeding.
7. The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 are
present in the Court today. They are being represented
by their respective counsel and being identified by
them. They have also filed the photocopies of their
respective Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity,
which are taken on record.
8. The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 have
filed joint affidavit before this Court dated 04.04.2025,
inter alia, stating as under:
“That, both the parties do hereby solemnly affirm &
state that they have signed this Settlement in the
form of Affidavit as follows:-
1. That, the 2nd Party/Opp. Party No. 2 lodged an FIR
before the Inspector-In-Charge, Sorada PS alleging
against the Petitioner/1″ Party on 23.05.2019 at
Page 3 of 6
about 6 P.M which was registered as P.S Case
No.81/2019 u/s 493/ 417/ 109/ 294/ 323/ 506/34
IPC corresponding to G.R Case No. 169 of 2019
pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C, Sorada.
(Annexure-1, Page-15 to 19).
2. That, basing on the aforesaid allegations as per the
F.LR story, investigation was conducted & ultimately
the Final Form was submitted before the learned
JMFC, Sorada, Ganjam on 30.11.2021 in Final
Form/Charge sheet No. 375 & accordingly vide Order
dated 07.12.2021, cognizance was taken against the
Petitioner. Accordingly the First Party filed the
aforesaid CRLMC No. 783/2025 for quashing of the
F.I.R dated & Order of Cognizance.
3. That, both the Petitioner (1″ Party) & Opp. Party No.
2 (2nd Party) are belongs to the same village and both
the families are known to each other. After lodging of
the F.I.R & registration of G.R Case & submission of
final form, both the family members sat together &
settled the dispute amicably on 4th March, 2025 in
their village and unanimously decided not to proceed
further in the aforesaid G.R Case No. 169 of 2019
arising out of Sorada P.S. Case No. 81 dated
23.05.2019.
4. That, on basis of the settlement made, the Opp.
Party No. 2 (2nd Party) appeared before this Hon’ble
Court on 11.03.2025 in the CRLMC No. 783/2025
through her Advocate Sri Ajit Kumar Mohanty & his
associates. The submissions were also made by both
the parties that they have entered into a settlement
outside the Court and not to proceed with Criminal
Proceeding i.e. G.R Case No. 16/2019.
5. That, it is relevant to mention here that as per the
amicable settlement made between the parties, it has
been decided that none of the parties will file any
further legal proceeding in any court of law against
the other party & the dispute involved in the G.R Case
No. 169 of 2019 in any manner whatsoever & all the
legal cases shall be withdrawn/will be quashed by
this Hon’ble Court. The Parties have decided for
submission of this Joint Affidavit in the form of
Settlement before this Hon’ble Court for quashing of
the F.I.R & Criminal Proceeding i.e. G.R Case no.
169/2019. This Settlement has been made without
any duress nor any compulsion in any manner
Page 4 of 6
whatsoever & intended to lead a peaceful life by both
the parties.
6. That, this Joint Affidavit/Settlement has been
prepared & both the parties have signed the same in
presence of their respective Advocates for kind
perusal of this Hon’ble Court.
7. That, in the interest of justice & fair play, this
Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to accept the
Joint Affidavit/Settlement as a part of the record &
accordingly pass necessary orders quashing the
F.I.R.”
9. The opposite party No.2-victim, who is present in
the Court today, on the query from the Court, states
that she wants to move on in her life. So she does not
want to continue the relationship with the petitioner
anymore. She further submits that pendency of this
case is causing stress in her life as a result of which
she is not able to concentrate in her carrier. Hence,
she wants to put a quietus to the same.
10. Mr. Nayak, learned Additional Government
Advocate and Mrs. Maharana, learned Additional
Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite party
No.1-State submits that reading of the materials
placed on record by way of the charge sheet reveals
that the relationship between the petitioner and the
opposite party No.2 were consensual. They have now
settled the dispute. The opposite party No.2 has filed
the joint affidavit before this Court even before the
Court, the opposite party No.2 has expressed her
desire to discontinue the criminal prosecution initiated
by her against the petitioner. Therefore, there is no
Page 5 of 6
legal impediment in quashing the present F.I.R.
11. Regard being had to the fact that the parties have
settled their dispute and they have also filed the
affidavit to that regard, I am inclined to allow the
present petition. In the fact scenario of the present
case, subjecting the petitioner to the rigors of trial is
destined to be a futile exercise. The present case is
squarely covered by the judgments of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh v. State of
Punjab and another, reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303;
B.S. Joshi & others v. State of Haryana &
another, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 and
Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia & another v.
Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and others,
reported in AIR 1988 SC 709, therefore, the petition
deserves merit.
12. Taking into consideration the aforementioned
judgments, the facts of the case and submissions
made at the Bar, the F.I.R. in connection with Sorada
P.S. Case No.81 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. Case
No.169 of 2019 pending in the Court of learned
J.M.F.C., Sorada and the consequential proceedings
arising therefrom qua the petitioner are quashed.
13. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
Signature Not Verified (S.S. Mishra)
Digitally Signed Judge
Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Subhasis
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 12-Apr-2025 15:10:16
Page 6 of 6