Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6438 (ORI)

DAMODAR TUDU v. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ,POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,CUTTACK

CRLMP/395/2026 · 2026-04-29

Miss Savitri Ratho

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 395 of 2026 Damodar Tudu …. Petitioner Mr. Anup Narayan Brahmachari, Advocate -versus- 1. Director General of Police, Odisha. Police Head Quarters, Cuttack 2. Superintendent of Police, Balasore 3. Inspector In-Charge, Simulia Police Station 4. Gada Sahu @ Gadadhara Sahu 5. Manoranjan Behera @ Ramani 6. Ranjan Behera @ Teru 7. Sangram Behera @ Sangram Kesari Behera 8. Sukanta Nayak …. Opp. Parties Mr. Saroj Kumar Rout, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 29.04.2026 (Through hybrid Mode) 05. 1. This CRLMP has been filed for issue of a direction for change in the Investigating Officer and for proper investigation in Simulia P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026 and to take steps to arrest the accused. 2. On 07.04.2026, as learned counsel for the Petitioner had made certain allegations against the I.O. as well as the investigation which were not stated in the CRLMP, he was permitted to file the same by way of an affidavit by 13.04.2026. When the matter was taken up on 15.04.2026 Mr. Anup Narayan p. 2 Brahmachari, learned counsel for the Petitioner prayed for an adjournment to file an affidavit as per the order dated 07.04.2026. Considering his prayer, the matter was adjourned to 27.04.2026. 3. No counsel had appeared on behalf of the Petitioner on 06.04.2026, for which the matter was adjourned to 07.04.2026. On 07.04.2026, the matter was adjourned to 15.04.2026. On 15.04.2026, learned counsel for the Petitioner had prayed for an adjournment in order to file the affidavit. On 27.04.2026, there was no appearance on behalf of the Petitioner, for which the matter was adjourned to today. 4. When the matter is taken up today, Mr. Anup Narayan Brahmachari, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that he has no instructions in the matter and files a memo to that effect. The same is taken on record. 5. No other counsel appears on behalf of the Partitioner. 6. In view of the memo, the CRLMP is dismissed for non- prosecution. 7. However, liberty is granted to the Petitioner for reviving the CRLMP within a period of three weeks from today. 8. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Sukanta Designation: Senior Stenographer