Suryakanta Sethy @ Suryakant Sethy vs State Of Odisha & Ors.

A.K. Mohapatra, J. :

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the Victim-Opposite Party No.2 and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Party.

By filing the present CRLMC application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the accused in C.T. Case No.70 of 2023, which corresponds to Khajuripada P.S. Case No.134 of 2023 registered for commission of offence punishable initially under Section 363 of the IPC and later on converted to Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act after filing of the charge-sheet on 24.12.2023and pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under POCSO Act, Phulbani, Kandhamal, has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled and that the accused and the victim are staying together, leading a happy conjugal life.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that initially the father of the victim (Opposite Party No.3), as informant, lodged the FIR on 25.09.2023 before the Khajuripada P.S. under section 363 of IPC inter alia alleging that the daughter of the informant, who was a minor at the relevant point of time, went outside and did not return to her home. Although the informant tried to contact the victim over her mobile phone, it was switched off. The FIR further reveals that the informant tried to locate the victim with the help of his friends and relatives. However, he could not locate her. Accordingly, the informant approached the concerned police station and lodged an FIR initially under section 363 of IPC.

Upon investigation, it was detected that the victim has eloped with the present Petitioner though she was a minor at the relevant point of time. On conclusion of the investigation, the I.O. filed the charge-sheet under the sections mentioned hereinabove. Thereafter, the case has been committed to the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Phulbani and registered as C.T. Case No. 70 of 2023.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted before this Court that both the Petitioner and the victim were in a love relationship. He further submitted that the Petitioner-accused is aged about 24 years. The victim, who was a minor at the time of occurrence, has in the meantime attained majority. He further contended that in the meantime the dispute has been resolved amicably and that both the families have given their consent to the marriage of the Petitioner and victim. Accordingly, they both have married each other. In the said context, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the marriage certificate dated 02.09.2025 which indicates that the marriage between the Petitioner and the victim had taken place on 12.03.2025. The marriage of the Petitioner and the victim, which was initially performed by AMOFOI, Bhubaneswar has been subsequently registered by the competent authority, i.e. at the District Registration Office, Phulbani.

With regard to the age of the victim, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the certificate of the victim issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha. Such certificate issued by BSE, Odisha reveals that the date of birth of the victim is 19.02.2007. Therefore, there is no dispute that the victim, in the meantime, has already attained majority.

Learned counsel appearing for the victim, on the other hand, supported the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. He further contended that both the Petitioner and the victim were in a love relationship and, in the meantime, they are married and staying together as husband and wife. He further submitted that the victim is leading a happy conjugal life along with her husband and they have also been blessed with a male child. In view of the aforesaid development, learned counsel for the victim contended before this Court that the further continuance of the present criminal case would cause disruption in their otherwise happy and peaceful marital life. Accordingly, it was contended before this Court that the victim will have no objection in the event this Court quashes the entire criminal proceeding against the present Petitioner and that the victim will have no objection to the same. Learned counsels appearing for both sides also referred to the joint affidavit filed before this Court. In the said joint affidavit, it has been categorically stated that they are married in the meantime and they have been staying together as husband and wife and leading a happy conjugal life.

On the basis of the joint affidavit as well as other materials placed on record before this Court, this Court, on the previous date, asked the learned counsel for the State to obtain instruction from the IIC of concerned police station. Learned counsel for the State on the basis of the instruction provided to him vide letter dated 20.10. 2025 by the IIC, Khajuripada Police Station, submitted before this Court that the marriage certificate filed by the Petitioner is genuine and, that he has verified the same from the District Sub-Registrar Office, Phulbani. A verification report of the District Sub-Registrar Office, Phulbani was also attached to the instruction dated 20.10.2025. However, the learned counsel for the State submitted before this Court that although the Petitioner had married the victim in the meantime, the offences alleged are serious in nature and that the victim was a minor at the relevant point of time. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State objected to the quashing of the present criminal proceeding.

This Court, on a careful scrutiny of the case record produced in course of hearing, examined the statement of the informant recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The informant, who happens to be the father of the victim, in his statement recorded by the Magistrate on 17.10.2025, has stated that his daughter has eloped with the Petitioner and they have been staying together for eight months and that he had no information as to whether his daughter had married the Petitioner or not. He has also stated that he has no information with regard to the where abouts of his daughter.

On perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. as well as under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., it is revealed that the Victim had a love relationship with the Petitioner and since the Victim was a minor at the relevant point of time, she could not marry the Petitioner. However, in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., the victim has categorically stated that she had eloped with the Petitioner. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. on 28.10.2022 substantially varies from her statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 25.09.2023. In her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., she has clearly admitted her love relationship with the Petitioner and, that when this fact was came to the knowledge of her family members, the same was objected to by her parents, as a result of which, she, on her own volition, eloped with the Petitioner from her native place to Bhubaneswar, where they stayed together, got married and continued cohabiting as husband and wife. She has also clearly stated that she wants to live with the Petitioner as his wife.

On a careful analysis of the factual background of the present case, further on a close scrutiny of the various documents brought to the notice of the Court during hearing of the matter, this Court observes that the irresistible conclusion which emerges is that the victim eloped with the Petitioner with whom she was in love. Later on, they got married and the marriage certificate produced before this Court was verified by the learned counsel for the State, through the local police station, to be genuine. Moreover, the parties have filed a joint affidavit before this Court wherein it has been categorically stated that they have already married, are living together as husband and wife and they have been blessed with a male child. The record further reveal that the Petitioner and the victim have now reconciled with the father of the victim. Therefore, on the basis of the materials on record it cannot be disputed that both the Petitioner and the informant are living together as husband and wife, leading a happy conjugal life and that the marriage solemnized between them is a valid marriage as both were major at the time the marriage was performed and the same was registered by the competent authority. In the aforesaid factual background, this Court is of the view that the present case is a fit case where this Court should exercise its inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. as any further continuance of the criminal proceeding against the Petitioner would be an abuse of the process of law and would be of no assistance in securing the ends of justice. Accordingly, this Court has no hesitation in quashing the present criminal proceeding. As such, the entire criminal proceeding in C.T. Case No.70 of 2023, corresponding to Khajuripada P.S. Case No.134 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Phulbani is hereby quashed.

The CRLMC application is allowed accordingly.