Orissa High Court
Subhankar @ Shubamkar Roy vs State Of Odisha & Another .... Opp. ... on 6 December, 2023
Author: Chittaranjan Dash
Bench: Chittaranjan Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No. 4312 of 2023
Subhankar @ Shubamkar Roy .... Petitioner
Mr. S.K. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Shashanka Patra, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No. 06.12.2023
01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State.
2. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks intervention of this Court for quashing of the entire proceeding in connection with T.R. No.41 of 2022 arising out of Kalimela P.S. Case No.197 of 2022 pending in the court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Malkangiri.
3. The background facts of the case are that, the informant's daughter (a minor girl aged about 17 years) while was prosecuting her Civil Diploma in Nabarangpur Govt. Polytechnics and staying in the hostel, was allegedly abducted by the Petitioner in a motorcycle from Nabarangpur to Visakhapatnam, and being allured of marriage the Petitioner cohabited with her at Visakhapatnam (Andhra Pradesh). However, on the next day the Petitioner left the victim in a bus under the threat that she would be killed if she ever dares to disclose the matter to anybody. Upon receipt of a telephonic Page 1 of 4 // 2 // message from the daughter regarding her return from Visakhapatnam by bus, the informant rushed towards Vishakhapatnam and got the track of her daughter on the way from Visakhapatnam to Nabarangpur at a place called Ramabhadrapuram.
4. As the victim was in trauma, in order to overcome the same, the informant sent his victim daughter to her aunt's house at Kalimela for a counseling by other members of the family. On 27.07.2022 at about 12 noon the informant also went to Kalimela to meet his daughter. There he found his daughter suddenly fell sick. On query, it was ascertained that she had consumed poisonous substance. Then she was immediately shifted to the CHC at Kalimela, where the concerned Medical Officer referred her to the DHH, Malkangiri where she breathed her last.
5. On the basis of a report lodged to that effect, the investigation commenced and, upon completion of the investigation, Final Form was submitted by the investigating agency implicating the present Petitioner in the offences under Sections 363/366-A/ 376(2)(n)/ 342/ 306/417/506/ 109/34, I.P.C. read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, keeping the investigation open under Section 173(8), Cr.P.C.
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the entire allegations against the Petitioner appearing in the F.I.R. as well as in the Charge-Sheet are false and fabricated. According to the learned counsel, the victim voluntarily left her hostel and went to Visakhapatnam and there is absolutely no material against the Petitioner that he abducted her. There is also no material to implicate the Petitioner under Section 376(2)(n), I.P.C. and, as such, the Page 2 of 4 // 3 // subsistence of the criminal proceeding would amount to abuse of the process of law and it be quashed.
7. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand vehemently opposed the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. According to the learned ASC, there are abundant materials against the present Petitioner right from the narrations in the F.I.R. till submission of the Charge-Sheet.
8. The statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. clearly implicate the present Petitioner in the alleged abduction as well as cohabitation of the Petitioner not only on the pretext of marrying the victim but also under coercion and by giving threats to her. From the call details record obtained by the police in course of the investigation reveals that the Petitioner made calls to the victim girl, and between the period from 12.07.2022 till 24.07.2022 he made as many as 278 calls to the victim girl and had a quarrel with her and finally he abandoned the victim, which led the victim to commit suicide, as she failed to reconcile with the situation and the trauma that she had undergone.
9. Needless to mention here that the power under Section 482, Cr.P.C. can be invoked in an eventuality where the F.I.R. does not disclose a case against the Petitioner, and/or the narrations made in the F.I.R. does not constitute an offence against the Petitioner. Neither of these two ingredients is found satisfied by the learned counsel for the Petitioner to quash the proceeding. On the contrary the allegations made both in the F.I.R. as well as in the Charge-sheet are tell tale clear to implicate the Petitioner in the alleged incident.
Page 3 of 4// 4 //
10. Considering the submissions made by the parties, the nature of the allegation, the gravity of the offence and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceeding, as prayed for. Accordingly, the CRLMC stands dismissed being devoid of merit.
(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge S.K. Parida Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SAMIR KUMAR PARIDA Designation: ADR-cum-ADDL. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY Reason: Authentic Copy Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Dec-2023 18:30:18 Page 4 of 4