IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 48 of 2026 Saraswati Das …. Petitioner Mr. Amulya Ratna Panda, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha, represented through the Secretary, Home Department, Bhubaneswar 2. Director General of Police, Cuttack 3. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Balasore 4. Superintendent of Police, Balasore 5. Inspector-in-Charge of Jaleswar Police Station …. Opp. Parties Mr. Saroj Kumar Rout, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 06.02.2026 (Through hybrid Mode) 02. 1. This CRLMP has been filed for a direction to the I.I.C., Jaleswar Police Station - Opposite Party No.5 to take appropriate action for proper investigation and complete the investigation of Jaleswar P.S. Case No. 53 of 2025. 2. On 28.01.2026, when the matter was listed, instructions dated 27.01.2026 of the I.I.C., Jaleswar Police Station had been produced where steps taken to trace the accused had been described. As this Court was not satisfied with the instructions, the matter was adjourned to today to enable the learned Additional Standing Counsel to obtain detailed up-to-date instructions as well as the case diary. 3. The instructions dated 01.02.2026 along with the case diary are produced by Mr. Saroj Kumar Rout, learned Additional Standing Counsel. 4. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the investigation is in progress. The statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS has been recorded. The accused has left the village and the I.O. has taken steps for apprehension of the accused, but has not been successful. He is also in contact with the cyber cell, Balasore. 5. In view of the detailed instructions of the I.I.C., Jaleswar Police Station and the steps taken by him for investigation and apprehension of the accused, no direction is necessary to be issued at this stage regarding investigation of the case or apprehension of the accused. 6. The CRLMP is therefore disposed of, with the expectation that the I.O. will continue his efforts and apprehend the accused at an early date. 7. The copy of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS is kept in a sealed cover and returned with the case diary to the learned Additional Standing Counsel. 8. The name of the victim has not been mentioned in the case diary. Page 3 of 3 9. But neither the learned counsel for the Petitioner nor the Registry have followed the guidelines of the Supreme Court at the time of filing of this CRLMP and have not redacted the name of the victim from the case records. They are directed to remove / redact the name of the victim from the case records especially the Annextures. The Registry shall replace these documents in the digital record after redaction of the name of the victim. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Sukanta Designation: Senior Stenographer