LAWS(ORI)-2023-7-59

MANORANJAN DASH Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

Decided On July 03, 2023
Manoranjan Dash Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ODISHA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashment of the criminal proceeding in connection with C.T. Case No. 864 of 2022 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar corresponding to Laxmisagar P.S. Case No. 62 dtd. 9/2/2022 on the ground that the allegations against him are out rightly false.

(2.) In fact, opposite party No.2 filed a complaint in 1 C.C. Case No. 786 of 2022 for a direction from the court of learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar under Sec. 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to the local P.S. to enquire into the allegations made therein and to take action against the petitioner according to law, later to which, Laxmisagar P.S. Case No. 62 was registered on 9/2/2022 under Ss. 417, 420, 376, 354 and 506 IPC. As per the complaint, opposite party No.2 is a working lady and having matrimonial dispute with her husband since past five years, whereas, the petitioner is working in the BDA and both of them have had a friendship since seven years before its filling. It has been alleged in the F.I.R. (Annexure-1) treated so after receiving the complaint that the petitioner subjected the complainant to mental harassment, torture and blackmailed her and also falsely promised her to marry after settlement of the matrimonial dispute. The further allegation in Annexure-1 is that the petitioner always demanded money from the informant and she finding no alternative, had to part with Rs.7,00,000.00 (rupees seven lakh) on different occasions along with other valuables. The other mischief and overt acts committed by the petitioner have been described therein. After Laxmisagar P.S. Case No. 62 was registered, the petitioner has approached this Court challenging the initiation of the criminal action pending before the learned Court below in connection with C.T. Case No. 864 of 2022.

(3.) Heard Mr. Sarangi, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the State besides Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for opposite party No.2.