Disposed¶23

Rekhalata Jena v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC29 Jan 2026CRLMP/1697/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRLMP No. 1697 of 2025, Orissa High Court, Justice Savitri Ratho, order dated 29.01.2026; mandamus for registration of FIR; Article 226 Constitution; Rajnagar Police Station, Kendrapara; Speed Post receipt 15.11.2025; Indira Awas house; forcible occupation of land belonging to accused persons; alternate remedy; Sudhir Bhaskar Rao Tambe vrs. Hemanta Yashwant Dhage (2016) 6 SCC 277; petition disposed of, no direction issued.

What did the court decide?

No direction issued to the Opposite Parties; petitioner left at liberty to avail alternate remedy available under law. ¶23

Rekhalata Jena Vs State of Odisha — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No direction issued to the Opposite Parties; petitioner left at liberty to avail alternate remedy available under law.

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing Opposite Party Nos. 3 and 4 to register the F.I.R. lodged by the petitioner against the accused persons.

¶16

Court's answer

There is no proof that the FIR in question was submitted at Rajnagar Police Station on 05.11.2025; the Speed Post receipt only showed documents sent on 15.11.2025 to the IIC, Rajnagar Police Station and the S.P., Kendrapara.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

It appeared to the Court, from the submissions and averments, that the petitioner is in forcible occupation of land belonging to the accused persons, who had objected to construction of an Indira Awas house on the said land.

¶20

Key takeaways

In view of the nature of allegations and the annexures to the CRLMP, this is not a fit case for exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution, and no direction is issued to the Opposite Parties.ratio¶21
The petitioner is at liberty to avail the alternate remedy available to her under law, in view of the Supreme Court decision in Sudhir Bhaskar Rao Tambe vrs. Hemanta Yashwant Dhage, (2016) 6 SCC 277, if so advised.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRLMP under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus to Opposite Party Nos. 3 and 4 (Superintendent of Police, Kendrapara and IIC, Rajnagar Police Station) to register an FIR the petitioner stated she had lodged on 05.11.2025. The Court found no proof that the FIR was submitted at Rajnagar Police Station on that date, noting only a Speed Post receipt showing documents sent on 15.11.2025 to the IIC and the S.P. From the submissions and averments, the Court observed that the petitioner appeared to be in forcible occupation of land belonging to the accused persons, who had objected to construction of an Indira Awas house on the land. Holding that, in view of the nature of allegations and the annexures, it was not a fit case to exercise power under Article 226 or issue any direction, the Court disposed of the CRLMP, leaving the petitioner at liberty to avail the alternate remedy available under law in view of Sudhir Bhaskar Rao Tambe vrs. Hemanta Yashwant Dhage, (2016) 6 SCC 277, if so advised.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 1697 of 2025

¶2

Rekhalata Jena ….. Petitioner Mr. Karunakar Gaya, Advocate

¶3

-versus-

¶4

1. State of Odisha 2. Director General of Police, Odisha, Cuttack 3. The Superintendent of Police, Kendrapara 4. The Inspector-in-Charge, Rajnagar Police Station, Kendrapara

¶5

….. Opposite Parties Mr. Raj Bhusan Dash, ASC

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

29.01.2026

Order No.

(Through hybrid mode)

¶13

This CRLMP has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶14

“It is therefore prayed that let this Hon'ble Court may

¶15

be graciously pleased to admit this petition, issue Rule NISI, calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why this petition shall not be allowed and as to why the F.I.R. lodged by the petitioner shall not be registered against the accused persons,

¶16

And if the opposite parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, this Hon'ble court may be pleased to allow this petition and issue a writ of mandamus directing the opposite party No.3 and 4 to register the F.I.R for the interest of justice.”

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

Mr. R.B. Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that the instructions have not been received.

¶19

Perusal of the petition reveals that there is no proof that the FIR, in question was submitted at the Rajnagar Police Station on 05.11.2025, however, the Speed Post receipt revealed that on 15.11.2025, documents have been sent to the IIC, Rajnagar Police Station and the S.P., Kendrapara.

¶20

In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the averments in the petition, it appears that the Petitioner is in forcible occupation of the land which belongs to the accused persons and they had objected for construction of Indira Awas house on the said land.

¶21

In view of the nature of allegations and the annexures annexed to the CRLMP, I do not consider this a fit case to exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution and issue any direction to the Opposite Parties.

¶22

However, the Petitioner is at liberty to avail alternate remedy which is available to her under law in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskar Rao Tambe vrs. Hemanta Yashwant Dhage reported in (2016) 6 SCC 277 , if she is so advised.

¶23

With the above observation, the CRLMP is disposed of.

¶24

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶25

puspa

¶26

Signature Not Verified puspa

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 29-Jan-2026 19:12:05

¶28

Page 2 of 2

Rekhalata Jena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rekhalata Jena 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manorama Swain Vs State of Odisha

Laxmipriya Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Arnapurna Behera Vs State of Odisha

Harish Ch.Dash Vs State

Anjana Kar Vs State of Orissa

Babula@Krushna Chandra Behera Vs State of Odisha