The Orissa High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a woman accused of forging a man’s signature on a sale deed to fraudulently obtain a marriage certificate under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and subsequently securing an interim maintenance order against him by claiming to be his wife.
Dismissing a revision petition filed by a woman named Puspanjali Swain, high court judge Justice V Narasingh held that a government handwriting expert’s opinion that the signatures did not match, combined with procedural irregularities in the marriage registration, was sufficient material for the trial court to proceed with the case.
Swain allegedly obtained the signature of a man named Shovan Kumar Sahoo under the pretext of executing a sale deed, and used it to register a marriage certificate dated January 16, 2020, under the Special Marriage Act. Sahoo has denied marrying Swain.
Swain, claiming to be Sahoo’s wife, filed a petition in a court under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking maintenance, compensation and shared accommodation. On May 4, 2022, the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM), Bhubaneswar, granted her interim relief of ₹7,000 per month along with permission to share the household.
Also Read:Ludhiana: Two firms booked for forging papers to obtain GST registrations
After this order Sahoo approached the Superintendent of Police, Puri, on May 18 alleging that the marriage certificate itself had been obtained through fraud. He lodged a first information report (FIR) at Puri Town police station on November 25, 2022 following which a chargesheet was filed on January 11, 2025, and cognizance taken by the SDJM, Puri, on January 18, 2025, under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the petitioner and four others.
Separately, Sahoo has also moved the family court, Bhubaneswar, seeking annulment of the marriage on the ground of fraud, under Section 25(iii) of the Special Marriage Act.
The high court said that police had sought a government handwriting expert’s opinion during the investigation.
The government examiner of questioned documents found that the signatures attributed to Sahoo on documents related to the alleged marriage did not match his admitted and specimen signatures. The chargesheet also flagged that procedural requirements under the Special Marriage Act had not been complied with. The case will now be heard by the SDJM, Puri.
