Soudamini Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Feb 2026CRLMP/136/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court order (Savitri Ratho, J., 18.02.2026) in CRLMP No. 136 of 2026: refusal to exercise Article 226 power to direct Balasore police (SP Balasore; IIC Balasore Sadar PS) to register FIR on complaints dated 16.11.2025 and 12.01.2026 against auction purchaser Mamata Tripathy (OP 5), Biraja Prasanna Tripathy (OP 4) and Rajib Kumar Behura (OP 6); sale certificate dated 07.11.2025; DRT Cuttack S.A No. 123 of 2025; I.A No. 1464 of 2025; CRLMP disposed of, no relief.

What did the court decide?

The allegations in the complaint are directed against the auction purchaser, Opposite Party No. 5 (Mamata Tripathy), and her son, Opposite Party No. 4 (Biraja Prasanna Tripathy). ¶¶17

Soudamini Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3 (Superintendent of Police, Balasore and IIC, Balasore Sadar Police Station) to register the petitioner's complaints lodged on 16.11.2025 and 12.01.2026 and to investigate the matter.

¶¶11

Court's answer

The allegations in the complaint are directed against the auction purchaser, Opposite Party No. 5 (Mamata Tripathy), and her son, Opposite Party No. 4 (Biraja Prasanna Tripathy).

¶¶17

Ratio / Principle

This is not a fit case to exercise power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a direction to the Opposite Parties to register an FIR against Opposite Party Nos. 4, 5 and 6.

¶¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

SINGLE-JUDGE ORDER (Savitri Ratho, J.; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; 18.02.2026) in CRLMP No. 136 of 2026 (filed 19.01.2026) — Petitioner Soudamini Nayak sought a direction to Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3 (Superintendent of Police, Balasore; IIC, Balasore Sadar Police Station) to register her complaints dated 16.11.2025 and 12.01.2026 (Annexure-5 series) and to investigate. Pursuant to this Court's orders dated 02.02.2026 and 10.02.2026, her counsel filed the date chart, the DRT Cuttack order dated 29.01.2026 in S.A No. 123 of 2025, copy of I.A No. 1464 of 2025 and the sale certificate dated 07.11.2025, which showed the land in question sold to Smt. Mamata Tripathy (Opposite Party No. 5) as purchaser-cum-successful bidder on 07.11.2025; counsel submitted the petitioner learnt of the sale only on 29.01.2026 at the DRT listing. Holding that the allegations were directed against the auction purchaser (Opposite Party No. 5) and her son (Opposite Party No. 4, Biraja Prasanna Tripathy), the Court found it not a fit case to exercise power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct registration of FIR against Opposite Party Nos. 4, 5 or 6 (Rajib Kumar Behura), and disposed of the CRLMP. No relief granted.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 136 of 2026

¶2

Soudamini Nayak ….. Petitioner

¶3

Mr. Bijaya Kumar Behera 1, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

1.State of Odisha 2. Superintendent of Police, Balasore 3. IIC, Balasore Sadar Police Station, Balasore 4. Biraja Prasanna Tripathy ….. 5. Mamata Tripathy Opposite Parties 6.Rajib Kumar Behura Mr. Raj Bhushan Dash, Additional Standing Counsel

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 18.02.2026

¶8

Order No.

¶9

(Through hybrid Mode)

¶10

04.

¶11

This CRLMP has been filed on 19.01.2026 for a direction to Opposite Party No. 2 and 3 to register the complaint lodged by the petitioner on 16.11.2025 and 12.01.2026 and to make proper investigation in the case as per the complaint under Annexure-5 series.

¶12

Pursuant to order dated 02.02.2026 and 10.02.2026 of this Court, date chart, copy of the order dated 29.01.2026 passed by the DRT, Cuttack in S.A No. 123 of 2025 and copy of the I.A No. 1464 of 2025 as well as the sale certificate dated 07.11.2025 has been filed by learned counsel for the petitioner on 10.02.2026. Copy of the same has also been served on Mr. R. B. Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel.

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

Perusal of the sale certificate reveals that the land in question has been sold to Smt. Mamata Tripathy, who is the purchaser-cumsuccessful bidder on 07.11.2025. This CRLMP has been filed in 19.01.2026. Mr. Bijaya Kumar Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she became aware of the successful auction sale on 29.01.2026 when the matter was listed before the DRT and counsel for the Bank informed about issue of sale certificate.

¶15

Mr. R. B. Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that the synopsis does not relate to the present case.

¶16

Perusal of the synopsis in this case reveals that synopsis relates to a case of Balasore Sadar Police Station.

¶17

As the allegations in the complaint are directed against the auction purchaser- Opposite Party No.5 and her son- Opposite Party No.4, I do not consider this to be a fit case to exercise power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a direction to the Opposite Parties to register FIR against them or Opposite Party No.6.

¶18