MANASI NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the matter has been listed for admission, on the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.

(2.) HEAR learned counsel for the parties and the petitioners, who are personally present in Court. Petitioner No.2 is the accused in G.R. Case No.95 of 2001 of the Court of learned SDJM, Khurda for the offence under Sections 363, 366 -A, IPC. It is alleged in the case that the petitioner No.2 kidnapped petitioner No.1 who was a minor girl and compelled her to marry. The petitioners have filed the present application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing the F.I.R. and the proceeding of the above noted case on the plea that the allegations are false and that they married each other out of their free will and are now leading a happy conjugal life.

(3.) LEARNED Addl. Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the offence alleged are not compoundable in nature and Section 320, Cr.P.C. operates as bar to compound the aforesaid offences. He however, submits that he has received a report from the concerned S.P. to the effect that the petitioners are actually living as husband and wife at Calcutta and have been blessed with a child. He submits that though technically the offences under Sections 363 and 366 -A, IPC have been made out, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceeding of G.R. Case No.95 of 2001 as the victim girl and the accused are now leading a happy conjugal life.