Jatindra Kumar Mishra Vs State of Odisha(Vig.) — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Jatindra Kumar Mishra Vs State of Odisha(Vig.) — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the learned trial Court to summon the I.T. Returns of D.W.1 (Pankaj Das) for the Assessment years 1990-1991 to 1993-1994, PAN No.AASPE6205G, from the Office of the I.T.O. of Ward No.4, Cuttack at the cost of the petitioner, with the trial Court to afford multiple opportunities to the petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 14.11.2025 of the learned Special Judge, Special Court, Cuttack (T.R. Case No.20 of 2013), rejecting the petitioner's application to summon the I.T.O. of Ward 4, Cuttack to submit the I.T. Return of D.W.1 (Pankaj Das) for the Assessment years 1990-1991 to 1993-1994 (PAN No.AASPE6205G), should stand or the summons should nonetheless be directed. +1 more

Court's answer

This Court disposed of the CRLMC with a direction to the learned trial Court to summon the pertinent records, thereby granting the substance of the petitioner's summons prayer through a modified route rather than setting aside or affirming the impugned rejection as such.

Ratio / Principle

The records to be summoned were specified as the I.T. Returns for the Assessment years 1990-1991 to 1993-1994 having PAN No.AASPE6205G of D.W.1, to be obtained from the Office of the I.T.O. of Ward No.4, Cuttack at the cost of the petitioner.

Key takeaways

As part of the operative direction, the trial Court was instructed to afford multiple opportunities to the petitioner, which the Court acknowledged may cause unnecessary delay in the trial proceeding (wording extracted exactly as printed; the phrasing appears internally anomalous but is reproduced verbatim per the no-conversion rule).ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRLMC No.5692 of 2025, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Jatindra Kumar Mishra v. State of Odisha (Vigilance)); coram: Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra; order dated 12.01.2026. The petitioner challenged the order dated 14.11.2025 of the learned Special Judge, Special Court, Cuttack in T.R. Case No.20 of 2013 rejecting his application to summon the I.T.O. of Ward 4, Cuttack to submit the I.T. Returns of D.W.1, Pankaj Das, for Assessment years 1990-1991 to 1993-1994 (PAN No.AASPE6205G). After hearing both sides - the Vigilance counsel opposing on the ground that the challenge only sought to prolong the trial - the Court disposed of the CRLMC by directing the trial Court to summon the said I.T. Returns from the Office of the I.T.O., Ward No.4, Cuttack at the petitioner's cost, and to afford multiple opportunities to the petitioner, which may cause unnecessary delay in the trial proceeding.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CRLMC No.5692 of 2025

Jatindra Kumar Mishra

…. Petitioner(s)

Mr. Devashis Panda, Advocate

-versus-

…. State of Odisha (Vigilance) Opposite Party(s)

Mr. Niranjan Moharana, ASC for Vigilance

CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

ORDER

Order No.

02.

1. Heard.

12.01.2026

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14.11.2025

passed by the learned Special Judge, Special Court, Cuttack in T.R. Case No.20 of 2013, whereby his application for summoning the I.T.O of ward 4, Cuttack to submit the I.T. Return of D.W.1, namely, Pankaj Das for the Assessment year 1990-1991 to 19931994 having PAN No.AASPE6205G has been rejected.

3. After arguing at length, Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the

petitioner has agreed that the prayer made by the petitioner to summon I.T.O. of Ward No.4, Cuttack to submit the I.T. Returns of D.W.1 may not be essential, if the I.T. Returns of the D.W.1 pertaining to the Assessment year 1990-1991 to 1993-1994 is

Page 1 of 2

brought on record through any official of Tax office. He made the said submission on the premises that D.W.1 has misplaced all old his I.T. Return.

4. Mr. Moharana, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department has vehemently opposed the prayer made by the petitioner and submitted that there is no illegalities in the impugned order and the challenge is only aimed at prolonging the trial.

5. Regard being had to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the records placed before this Court, I am inclined to dispose of this matter with

a direction to the learned trial Court to summon the pertinent records i.e. the I.T. Returns for the Assessment year 1990-1991 to 1993-1994 having PAN No.AASPE6205G of the D.W.1 from the Office of I.T.O. of Ward No.4, Cuttack at the cost of the petitioner. The trial Court shall afford multiple opportunity to the petitioner, which may cause unnecessary delay in the trial proceeding.

6. With this observation, the CRLMC is disposes of.

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH (S.S. Mishra) Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Judge Location: High Court of Orissa Swarna Date: 13-Jan-2026 19:03:38

Page 2 of 2