Rashmi Ranjan Nag Vs State of Odisha

Instant revision is filed by the petitioner assailing the order of cognizance dated 3^rd September, 2025 passed in connection with S.A. Case No.29 of 2025 by the learned District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Nuapada on the grounds stated therein.

¶16

Referring to the FIR at Annexure-1, Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the name of the petitioner is not mentioned therein nor anything adverse has been revealed against him in the chargesheet i.e. Annexure-2. The statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are also referred to claiming that none of them has alleged the involvement of the petitioner with regard to the incident described in Annexure-1, hence, therefore, the

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

impugned order of cognizance dated 3^rd September, 2025 at Annexure-3 is liable to be interfered with and set aside.

¶19

Recorded the submission of Ms. Dash, learned ASC for the State.

¶20

Gone through the contents of the FIR at Annexure-1, which reveals an incident to have taken place in 2023 and learnt about the same by the informant after having received a video clip on 29^th June, 2025 revealing the involvement of a Havildar, namely, Laxmi Narayan Naik, who said to have abused the members of their society, namely, Satnami Samaj. After the closure of investigation, as it is further made to reveal the chargesheet was filed against the said Havildar and also the petitioner. On a reading of the chargesheet i.e. Annexure-2, this Court does not find any material against the petitioner. Furthermore, on a reading of the statements of the witnesses recorded during investigation, the Court finds that nothing has been whispered against the petitioner, rather, the involvement of the Havildar, above named, has been revealed by all of them. In fact, the said statements are stereotype only alleging the mischief to have been committed by said Laxmi Narayan Naik, who at the relevant point of time posted as a Constable and subsequently promoted as Havildar. Under such circumstances, it is not revealed either from the record or the impugned order at Annexure-3 as to what prevailed upon the learned Court below to take cognizance of the alleged offences against the petitioner. Instead, the Court finds that there has been no discussion at all by the learned Court below, while taking cognizance of offences against the petitioner as well upon

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

receiving the charge-sheet i.e. Annexure-2 highlighting upon the materials on record. Having said that, the conclusion of the Court is that the learned Court below did not examine the chargesheet and all such documents filed therewith before passing the impugned order of cognizance dated 3^rd September, 2025. It can very well be said that there has been no judicial application of mind by the learned court below. With the above conclusion, the Court is inclined to interfere with the impugned order i.e. Annexure-3 and to direct the learned Court below to freshly consider taking cognizance of the offences, if any, against the petitioner with proper notice to the opposite party as such course of action would rather serve the purpose and meets the ends of justice.

¶23

6. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶24

In the result, the revision petition stands allowed. As a necessary corollary, the impugned order dated 3^rd September, 2025 at Annexure-3 in S.A. Case No.29 of 2025 is hereby set aside with a direction to the learned District & Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Nuapada to freshly consider taking cognizance of the offences vis-à-vis the petitioner examining the chargesheet i.e. Annexure-2 and the documents filed therewith and thereafter, to pass appropriate order as per and in accordance with law.

¶25

8. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

(R.K. Pattanaik) Digitally Signed Signed by: ALOK RANJAN SETHY Judge Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURTAlok Date: 12-Nov-2025 14:15:03

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Rashmi Ranjan Nag v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashmi Ranjan Nag v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Panigrahi Vs Collector ,Rayagada

T.Nagbhusan Rao Vs Collector, Rayagada

Angurbala Sahu@Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Amitav Panda Vs Jashabidya Dash

Trinath Vihar Resident Welfare Association, Cuttack Vs State of Odisha

Abhi Behera Vs State of Odisha