IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.12898 of 2012 Mulamati Pradhan …. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Jena, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Party Mr. S.P. Das, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 18.05.2026 07. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Pursuant to the order dtd.07.05.2026, learned Addl. Standing Counsel produced the instruction so provided by the Department vide letter dtd.15.05.2026. Copy of the instruction is also provided to the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner in Court today. 4. Basing on the instruction, it is contended that with regard to allegation of custodial death of the deceased, the matter was carried to the National Human Rights Commission as well as Odisha Human Rights Commission. National Human Rights Commission closed the matter taking note of the fact that Odisha Human Rights Commission has already assumed cognizance of the matter. Thereafter, Odisha Human Rights Commission in Case No.1755 of 2012, conducted a thorough examination of all the relevant materials and documents placed before it. By its order dtd.12.04.2013, the OHRC held as follows:- “(a) There was no negligence on the part of the jail authorities. (b) There was no custodial violence of foul place of any nature. (c) No basis existed for attributing legal liability to the State.” 4.1. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State accordingly contended that since OHRC in its order dtd.12.04.2013 has come to a definite conclusion that there is no negligence on the part of the Jail authority, and there was no custodial violation of foul play of any nature and no basis existed for attributing legal liability on the State, the Writ Petition with the prayer as made is not entertainable. 5. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court is of the view that the prayer as made in the Writ Petition on the face of the order of the Odisha Human Right Commission dtd.12.04.2013 in Case No.1755 of 2012 is not entertainable. 5.1. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition with the prayer as made, and the Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Subrat Judge