p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 253 of 2026 Bharati Mohapatra ….. Petitioner Ms. Anima Dei, Advocate -versus- 1.State of Odisha 2.Inspector General of Police, Cuttack 3.Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur 4.Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Jagatsinghpur 5.IIC, Jagatsinghpur Town Police Station, Jagatsinghpur 6.Bijayalaxmi Mohapatra ….. Opposite Parties Mr. Sarathijyoti Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 05.03.2026 Order No. 01. (Through hybrid Mode) 1. This CRLMP has been filed for a direction to the Opposite Parties No. 5 & 2 to register a case on the written report of the petitioner and take legal action against the Opposite Party No.6 and also for a direction to restrain the accused from entering over the Plot No. 1654, 1655, 2027 and 2027/4039 under Khata No. 380 of Mouza Kathiapada in the district of Jagatsinghpur and not to make any construction on it and to prosecute Opposite Party No.6 and punish her in accordance with law. 2. The allegation of the petitioner is that although the land in question is the ancestral property of the petitioner’s father and the petitioner and her sisters along with Opposite Party No.6 (wife of the p. 2 pre-deceased brother) have equal right over the land, but Opposite Party No.6 after mutating the land in her favour by furnishing false information and without informing or taking the consent of the petitioner and her sisters, had sold the land with dishonest intention on 07.05.2024. Although the petitioner has submitted written report on 24.10.2025, 03.12.2025, 04.01.2026 and 02.02.2026 before the IIC, Jagatsinghpur Town Police Station, no case has been registered. The Mutation orders have been challenged by the petitioner and her sisters. 3. Mr. S. J. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that perusal of the CRLMP and the Annexures would reveal that the allegations of the petitioner make out a civil dispute and she and her sisters have already approached the authorities challenging the order of mutation. He further submits that there is no document annexed to the CRLMP to indicate that the FIRs have been submitted to the IIC, Jagatsinghpur Town Police Station at any time. 4. Considering the nature of allegations and in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage : (2016) 6 SCC 277, as the Petitioner has alternate efficacious remedy, I am not inclined to issue any direction in the CRLMP for registration of an FIR. 5. It is open to the petitioner to avail the alternate remedy which is available to her, if she is so advised. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Subhalaxmi SAHOO