Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2033 DAILYLAW 1 (ORI)

GAJENDRA ROUT v. STATE OF ODISHA

ABLAPL/2033/2026 · 2026-04-16

R K Pattanaik

body2033

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.2033 of 2026 Gajendra Rout …. Petitioner Mr. Sourav Das, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha & another …. Opposite Party Mr. M.K. Mohanty, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 16.04.2026 01. 1. Since no FIR is lodged, recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner to the effect that the proceeding under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act pending between the parties and there is no lodging of FIR at the behest of the wife, namely, opposite party No.2 at present but he is being called upon by the P.S. concerned, this Court is of the view that he should respond to the same but at the same time, needs for protection from arrest. It is further submitted that the petitioner is summoned by the P.S. concerned and while claiming so, the call details in that regard with a memo filed is produced for the Court’s perusal. 2. In view of the above and considering the dispute between the parties, this Court reiterates that in the event any such report is lodged from the side of opposite party No.2, the petitioner should not be immediately taken into custody at least a period of four weeks’ thereafter. 3. Accordingly, it is ordered. 4. In the result, ABLAPL is disposed of with the direction as aforesaid. It is made clear that the petitioner shall respond to the summons of the P.S. concerned without default and to extend co-operation in the enquiry. 5. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Alok