Khireswar Meher Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

2. The Petitioner has filed this CRLMC seeking a prayer to quash the order dated 12.02.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Bargarh in Crl. Misc. Case No.6 of 2025 arising out of V.G.R Case No.43 of 2025.

¶13

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner had filed a petition under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Bargarh which was registered as Criminal Misc. No.6 of 2025 for release of her Car from the list of Assets of Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.14 of 2023, which was rejected without assigning any reasonable cause of

¶14

Signature Not Verifiedsuch dismissal of Petition vide order dated 12.02.2026.

¶15

Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Apr-2026 15:06:28

¶16

2

¶17

4. He further submits that although from the date of Registration of F.I.R of Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.14 of 2023 and subsequent preparation of list of income and expenditure including asset of Petitioner's Father- in-Law wrongly adding the aforesaid Car of the Petitioner showing it to be the property of his Father-in-Law, the Petitioner persuaded the Vigilance authority to release the aforesaid Car from the list of asset of her Father in-Law as the same is no way connected with this case. But, the Vigilance authority with one plea or the other have not responded to it and, moreover, although with the specific stand of such purchase of Car on 13.2.2021 out of the Own source of Income of the Petitioner and also by taking Loan from Bank of India, Anithapali Branch and till date payment of Rs. 13,000/- as EMI is being paid, but, not a single Rupee of his Father-in-law has been added while purchasing the Car the Petitioner has advanced his contention before the Learned Court, the same was not considered and mechanically rejected the same by the Learned Court below. Hence, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court seeking a direction to the Investigating Officer to release the Petitioner's Car in his Zima to secure the ends of Justice.

¶18

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and on going through the averments made in this petition,

¶19

this Court is inclined to quash the order dated 12.02.2026 passed by the Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Apr-2026 15:06:28

¶21

3

¶22

learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Bargarh in Crl. Misc. Case No.6 of 2025 arising out of V.G.R Case No.43 of 2025.

¶23

6. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Bargarh is directed to release the above-said seized vehicle in question in the zima of the petitioner subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall;

¶24