Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8499 (ORI)

DEBENDRA KUMAR SAHOO v. STATE OF ODISHA

CRLMP/84/2026 · 2026-02-17

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. 84 of 2026 Debendra Kumar Sahoo ….. Petitioner Mr. Ashok Kumar Sahoo, Advocate -versus- 1.State of Odisha 2.Superintendent of Police, Kendrapara 3. Sub-collector, Kendrapara 4. Inspector-in-charge, Kudanagari PS, Kendrapara 5. Sanjay Sahoo 6. Niranjan Sahoo 7. Bijay Ku. Sahoo 8. Rasananda Sahoo ….. Opposite Parties Mr. Sarathi Jyoti Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 17.02.2026 Order No. 02. (Through hybrid Mode) 1. This CRLMP has been filed praying for adequate police protection for construction of boundary wall over the petitioner’s land and for legal action against the Opposite Parties 5 to 8 for their illegal activities. 2. Mr. A. K. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of order dated 13.07.2023 passed in Demarcation Case No. 24 of 2022, he is not being allowed to construct boundary wall on his land. 3. Mr. S. J. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that in April 2024, the ASI, Kudanagari Police Station had inquired into the matter and informed the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Kendrapara that Khata No. 223, Plot No. 3029 Area A0.4 Dec Mouza-Korua stood recorded in the name of the petitioner, while the Opposite Parties were forcible enclosing the land of the petitioner after demarcation, for which there was possibility of serious breach of peace in the locality. He submits that almost two years have elapsed in the meanwhile. If there is still apprehension of breach of peace, the petitioner should approach Opposite Party No.2- Superintendent of Police, Kendrapara and the Opposite Party No.4- IIC, Kudanagari Police Station and police protection will be provided, if required to prevent breach of peace. 4. Mr. A. K. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall approach the Opposite Party No.2 and 4 within a period of two weeks. 5. If the application is filed within a period of two weeks as undertaken, steps for extending police help to the petitioner shall be taken by Opposite Party No.2 and 4, if there is no other legal impediment. 6. The CRLMP is accordingly disposed of. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Subhalaxmi Designation: Junior Stenographer