Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20109 (ORI)

INFORMANT v. STATE OF ODISHA

CRLMP/648/2026 · 2026-05-22

Miss Savitri Ratho

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 648 of 2026 Informant …. Petitioner Mr. Manoranjan Mishra, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Orissa Represented through its secretary Home department, Bhubaneswar 2. I.I.C., Dhamara Police Station 3. S.P. Bhadrak …. Opp. Parties Mr. Ashok Kumar Apat, Additional Government Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 22.05.2026 03. (Through hybrid Mode) 1. There is a typographical error in the order dated 20.05.2026. Inadvertently, it has been stated that the matter will be taken up in the Chamber at 12.45 P.M. 2. The words ‘in the Chamber’ be deleted from the order dated 20.05.2026. 3. Pursuant to order dated 20.05.2026, instructions dated 21.05.2026 of the OIC, Dhamara Police Station is received where apart from giving the background of the case as per his investigation, it has been stated as follows:- “1. That, on the written report of petitioner Menaka Jena (28) D/o- Lt. Kamala Kanta Dalai of vill- Pradyutnagar, P.S-Dhamaral, Dist- Bhadrak Dhamara P.S Case No- 21 dt.26.03.2026 U/s- 296/74/351(2)/3(5) BNS has been regd. and investigated into. 2. That, the petitioner alleged against the accused persons namely Sukanta Dalai and Sukadev Dalai both are of S/o- Kabi Kumar Dalai of of vill- Pradyutnagar, P.S-Dhamaral, Dist- Bhadrak, who abused her in filthy languages and threatened with dire consequence in Case no- 21/2026. 3. That, the Petitioner got married to one Rajesh Jana of village Chardia, P.s-Bansada, Dist- Bhadrak. Due to family disturbances now she is staying in her parental house at village Pradyutnagar, P.s- Dhamara, Dist- Bhadrak. 4. That, the petitioner and OP members namely Sukanta Dalai and Sukadev Dalai are cousin brother and sister having one ancestor. The father of the petitioner Kamala Kanta Dalai passed away since 16 year back. After the death of the father of the petitioner, ill feeling is continuing between the family of petitioner and O.P.(Accused) due to division of land property. 5. Jabarain Dalai (Sister in law of petitioner) filed one 1CC in the hon'ble court of JMFC, Chandabali, Basing on which Dhamara P.S regd. P.S Case No- 14 dt.18.03.2026 U/s- 332(c)/ 296/ 115(2)/ 126(2)/ 303(2)/ 324(4)/ 109(1)/ 351(2) /3(5) BNS and ended in C.S U/s- 296/115(2)/126(2)/351(2)/74/3(5) BNS against the accd. 1. Sukanta Dalai and 2. Sukadev Dalai and also the petitioner is narrated as witness in this case. In this regard to maintain peace in the locality submitted P.R and counter PR U/s- 126 BNSS against both the parties by I.O. ASI Khirod Ku. Parida. 6. That, the amount of the fact narrated in the FIR of petitioner in Dhamara P.S Case No- 21/2026 is partially true, leaving the allegation of intimidation of sexual assault to the petitioner as it has been ascertained by local witness. 7. That, on 01.05.2026 both petitioner and O.P members reported at Dhamara P.S. In this regard an enquiry was held up and it was ascertain that, there was only verbal quarrel held up due to land boundary dispute. Both the parties were called to P.S and amicable settlement was held that, both the parties don't indicate and abuse to each other. 8. That, the F.F will be submitted in stipulated period in Dhamara P.S Case No-21/2026.” 4. The Petitioner has reported before the Police Station that the accused persons are threatening her for which Dhamara P.S. Case No. 21 of 2026 has been registered. She has submitted another complaint on 01.05.2026. Page 4 of 4 Puspa/subhalaxmi 5. Hence, these instructions by the OIC, Dhamara Police Station appear to be casual and are rejected. 6. In view of the apprehension of the Petitioner which is not being taken seriously by the IIC, Dhamara Police Station, it is directed that until steps are taken for investigation into both the complaints and the accused is not apprehended, the Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 shall ensure her safety by posting a Home Guard outside the house of the Petitioner until further orders. 7. The CRLMP is disposed of. 8. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Savitri Ratho) Judge SAHOO