SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 1257

ORISSA HIGH COURT
BISWAJIT BEHERA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ODISHA – Respondent
CRLMC 5125 / 2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No. 5125 of 2025 Biswajit Behera …. Petitioner(s)

Mr. S. Sourav, Advocate -versus-

State of Odisha and another …. Opposite Party(s)

Ms. S. Devi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

ORDER

16.01.2026 Order No.

03. 1. Heard.

2. At the instance of the opposite party No.2, the F.I.R. in Banigochha P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025 came to be registered against the petitioner corresponding to Special G.R. Case No. 81 of 2025, pending in the court of the learned ADJ-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Nayagarh registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 137(2)/87/64(2) of BNS, 2023.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 18.11.2025, the victim appeared before the IIC, Banigochha Police Station and submitted a written report alleging therein that on 11.11.2025, the Petitioner had invited her to Dasapalla to meet him through mobile phone on the pretext of marriage. When she reached the Dasapalla bus stand, the Petitioner took her to Puja Lodge where they stayed together. On the next day, the petitioner left for his home. On 13.11.2025, while searching for the Petitioner, the victim reached Banigochha. The Petitioner then took her to his aunt's house and on 14.11.2025, he took her to his Khudi (Aunt)'s house at Bhubaneswar. On 15.11.2025, the Petitioner's family members came there, scolded the victim, and took the Petitioner away with them. Thereafter, she faced several difficulties. It is further alleged that the Petitioner had established physical relationship with her on the false promise of marriage. On the basis of such report Banigochha P.S. Case No.133 dtd.18.11.2025 was registered against the Petitioner.

4. Investigation in the present case is going on. During the investigation, the statement of the victim has been recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. corresponding section 183 BNSS, 2023. The victim has reiterated her statement, as has been given to the police on the basis of the FIR registered. When the matter stood thus, the parties have entered into a settlement, as per the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. The father of the victim as well as the victim are present in the Court and being represented and identified by their respective counsels. They have also filed self-attested copies of their Aadhaar Cards to establish their identity, which are taken on record.

6. The father of the victim has filed an affidavit before this Court, inter alia, stating as under:-

“2. That, due to certain misunderstandings, emotional distress and confusion, the FIR in the aforementioned case came to be lodged against the Petitioner herein. The FIR was lodged under the above circumstances and the same resulted from miscommunication between the families.

3. That, upon intervention of well-wishers, respected elders and after discussion between both families, there remains no subsisting dispute, grievance or allegation against the Petitioner.

4. That, neither I nor my daughter/informant have any objection if the FIR and the entire criminal proceeding arising out of it are quashed by this Hon'ble Court. We voluntarily support the prayer for quashing, without any coercion, threat, undue influence or inducement from any person.

5. That, the victim girl is presently in a stable emotional condition and has expressed her free and voluntary consent for not proceeding with the aforementioned criminal case any further.

6. That, continuation of the aforementioned criminal proceeding will serve no fruitful purpose and may cause unnecessary hardship to both families. The Petitioner and our family have mutually decided to maintain peace and cordial relations.

7. That, I state on oath that the statements are genuine, voluntary and in the best interest of the victim. I fully understand the nature and seriousness of the case and state that we do not wish to pursue the prosecution.”

7. The petitioner is a young man of 21 years and the victim is 17 years of age, therefore both of them are of same a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top