Orissa High Court
Pitabasa Sahu @ Tulu vs State Of Odisha & Another …. Opp. … on 8 April, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.1057 of 2025
Pitabasa Sahu @ Tulu .... Petitioner
Mr. Manoj
Kumar
Mohanty(2),
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opp. Parties
Mrs.Sarita
Maharana, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order ORDER
No. 08.04.2025
02.
1.
Heard.
2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the
F.I.R. in connection with Ranpur P.S. Case No.132 of
2015 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.16 of
2015 came to be registered against the petitioner on
17.05.2015 for the alleged commission of offences
punishable under Sections 448/376/294/506/34 of
the IPC r/w Section 6 of the POCSO Act, pending in
the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge under POCSO Act, Nayagarh.
3. The opposite party No.2 reported at P.S. alleging
Page 1 of 6
therein that, on 15.05.2015 at about 10 P.M. night,
while the informant was alone at home, the petitioner
forcibly came to her house and committed rape on her.
When the informant shouted, the villagers gathered at
the spot. The village people rescued the informant
from the petitioner. Hence, the F.I.R.
4. The investigation of the present case is still going
on. Even after lapse of about ten years, the police has
not filed the charge sheet as yet. In the meantime, the
victim girl has become major. At present she is about
26 years old. She has already settled in her life by
marrying somewhere else and she has been blessed
with a daughter. Elongation of the present case is
creating problem in her marital life. Therefore, she is
not willing to proceed with the matter anymore. Since
she was a minor at the time of commission of the
offence and her father had filed the complaint.
However, now she has moved in her life.
5. 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.
6. On the intervention of the village gentries, well-
wishers and family members, the matter has been
settled between the parties keeping in mind that the
victim girl has already settled in her marital life and
Page 2 of 6
moved on. At this juncture, the petitioner has filed the
present petition seeking quashing of the entire
criminal prosecution on the basis of the development
which has unfolded between 2015 till today.
7. The opposite party No.2 has filed an affidavit
before this Court dated 08.04.2025, inter alia, stating
as under:
“1. That I am the informant/opposite party No.2 in
the afore stated CRLMC in connection with Ranpur
P.S. Case No.132 of 2015 corresponding to Special
G.R. Case No.16 of 2015 now pending in the Court of
the learned Addl. Sessions Judge under POCSO Act,
Nayagarh for alleged offences under Sections
448/376/294/506/34 IPC, read with Section 6 of
POCSO Act.
2. That, in the meantime charge-sheet has not been
filed against the petitioner, which is under challenge
in the aforesaid CRLMC and the same is pending
before this Hon’ble Court.
3. That due to some misunderstanding, I have lodged
the aforesaid F.I.R. before the I.I.C., Ranpur Police
Station.
4. That in the meantime due to the intervention of the
local gentries, the matter has already been settled
between me and my family with the accused-
petitioner. So I do not want to proceed with the case
henceforth. I have no objection if criminal proceeding
will be dropped.
5. That since I am major and married with another
person where I am leading my happy marital life.
6. That, the pendency of aforesaid Special G.R. Case
and since the police is not filed the charge sheet it
may cause harm to my marital life, so I requested to
the petitioner filing of this CRLMC accordingly he filed
and now I am filing this affidavit.”
8. Similarly, the victim girl, who is 26 years of age,
Page 3 of 6
has also filed an affidavit before this Court dated
08.04.2025, inter alia stating as under:
1. That I am the father of the informant/victim/ opp.
party No.2 in the afore stated CRLMC in connection
with Ranpur P.S. Case No.132 of 2015 corresponding
to Special G.R. Case No.16 of 2015 now pending in
the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge under
POCSO Act, Nayagarh, for alleged offences under
Sections 448/376/294/506/34 IPC, read with
Section 6 of POCSO Act.
2. That in the meantime charge-sheet has not been
filed against the petitioner, which is under challenge
in the aforesaid CRLMC and the same is pending
before this Hon’ble Court.
3. That due to some misunderstanding, my
daughter/opp. party No.2 have lodged the aforesaid
F.I.R. before the I.I.C., Ranpur Police Station.
4. That in the meantime due to the intervention of
the local gentries, the matter has already been settled
between us and the accused- petitioner. So we do not
want to proceed with the case henceforth. I have no
objection if the criminal proceeding will be dropped.
5. That, since my daughter was minor at the time of
occurrence and now she is major and married.
Although my daughter was in love with the petitioner
but I arranged the marriage of my daughter with
another person where she is leading happy marital
life.
6. That, the pendency of aforesaid Special G.R. and
since the police is not filed the charge sheet it may
cause harm to the marital life of my daughter. So I
requested to the petitioner filing of this CRLMC
accordingly he filed and now I am filing this affidavit
for and on behalf of my daughter.”
9. The victim girl, who is appearing in person before
this Court, on the query from the Court states that
she has already married somewhere else and she has
been blessed with a child and moved on in life.
Page 4 of 6
However, continuation of the present proceeding is
creating problem in her marital life. Hence, she does
not want to prosecute the petitioner anymore in this
case and wants to put a quietus to the entire dispute.
10. Mrs. Maharana, learned Additional Standing
Counsel appearing for the opposite party No.1-State
submits that the parties have settled their dispute.
They have also filed an affidavit before this Court in
that regard. Therefore, there is no 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 Ranpur
Page 5 of 6
P.S. Case No.132 of 2015 corresponding to Special
G.R. Case No.16 of 2015 pending in the Court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
under POCSO Act, Nayagarh and the consequential
proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioner are
quashed.
13. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Subhasis
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 08-Apr-2025 19:54:00
Page 6 of 6