IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.24010 of 2025 Ashutosh Jena …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Jitendra Kumar Mishra (2), Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. Debraj Mohanty, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 16.04.2026 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, making the following prayer:- “The petitioner, therefore, most respectfully prays that your Lordship's may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition and issue notice to the opp.parties to show cause as to why a direction shall not be given to refund the money which was taken away by the fraudsters. And on their failing to show cause or showing in sufficient cause make the Rule absolute and this Hon'ble. Court may pass an appropriate order/direction by directing to the Opp.parties to refund the petitioner money which was taken away by fraudsters of Rs.99,500/-time within a stipulated time. And pass such further order/orders deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and allow the case with cost. Page 2 of 3 And for which kind act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 3. It is contended by the petitioner that, at his instance, an F.I.R. bearing Whitefield P.S. Case No.0425 of 2023 was registered on 06.10.2023. The petitioner claims to be a victim of cybercrime, whereby a sum of Rs. 99,500/- has been fraudulently siphoned off from his bank account. Accordingly, he seeks a direction from this Court for refund of the said amount by his banker, which is under scanner of investigating agency. He further submits that he has no clue regarding the stage of the investigation in the cyber crime case. 4. Upon consideration, this Court finds that invocation of writ jurisdiction in the present case is misplaced because the investigation of the case appears to be going on. If at all any remedy is available to him, the petitioner should resort to the said remedy under the Cr.P.C. or B.N.S.S by filing appropriate application in the concerned court after obtaining information regarding the stage of investigation. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no information regarding the status of the investigation or as to whether his account has been frozen. It is further submitted that despite approaching the opposite party No.4-Branch Manager, SBI, Bhuban Branch, Kalibazar to know about the status of his account, the said opposite party No.4 has not disclosed anything. 6. In that view of the matter, limited indulgence can be granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the opposite party No.4 is directed to apprise the petitioner the status of the Account No.30972463721 once he approaches. 7. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Swarna