Subarna Kesharee Udaysingh Vs State of Odisha

“Under such Circumstances, the Petitioner therefore Pray that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Admit the Writ Application, issue RULE NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties more especially Opp. Party No.2 to Show Cause as to why the filing of Charge-Sheet in a hasty and mechanical manner without even proper Investigation and to screen the offenders of Jankia P.S.Case No-103 of 2025 as per Annexure No.2 shall not be declared to be illegal, arbitrary and malafied one.

¶18

And upon showing no Cause or insufficient Cause the RULE be made absolute by allowing the Writ Application with a further direction for re-investigation of Jankia P.S. Case No-103 of

¶19

Page 1 of 5

¶20

2025 as per Annexure No-1 by handing over the Investigation to a senior Police Officer to unearth the Truth, along with a further direction to Arrest the Author of the Crime and to submit the Charge Sheet within a Short time Period.

¶21

And to pass any other Order or orders and to grant any other Relief/Reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper to meet the circumstance.

¶22

And to Pass any other order/orders as this Hon'ble Court deems, fit and proper.”

¶23

Pursuant to order dated 30.04.2026, Mr. Saroj Kumar Rout, learned Additional Standing Counsel has produced the instructions dated 08.05.2026 of the I.I.C., Jankia Police Station, Khordha and he has also produced the xerox copy of the case diary in the said case and the final report No. 93 dated 30.04.2025.

¶24

Mr. A. Behera, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that perusal of the record would reveal that without conducting proper investigation, charge sheet has been submitted hurriedly within 21 days of registration of Jankia P.S. Case No. 103 of 2025. He also submits that although in the FIR it has been specifically stated that Jajati Keshori Udayasingh, brother of the Petitioner has also been injured, but his statement has not been recorded nor has any investigation been carried out regarding the injury sustained by him. The medical officer of District Headquarters Hospital, Khurda who examined the Petitioner and submitted injury report has not been cited as a witness in the charge sheet. Requisition has been submitted by the A.S.I. of Police on 09.04.2025 in respect of the Petitioner and the medical

¶25

Page 2 of 5

¶26

officer, DHH, Khurda has submitted two injury reports, one submitted on 09.04.2025 indicates a lacerated injury 3 cm x 1 cm x 0.5 cm in front of the left ear and laceration of 2 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm on the parietal head midline and on 05.09.2025, in addition to the above two injuries the x-ray of the right hand revealed a fracture over the ring finger middle phalanx which is grievous in nature.

¶27

It is stated in the instructions as follows:-

¶28

“The complainant Subarna Kesharee Udayasingh is also an accused in the counter case No. 102 dated 09.04.2025 under sections 296/115(2)/351(2)/3(5) BNS, and he had absconded from the village to avoid police arrest. After being released on court bail, he appeared at the P.S. and alleged that due to assault by the accused persons, he had received grievous injuries. During treatment at DHH Khordha, as per the advice of the Medical Officer, he underwent an X-ray examination at DHH Khordha.

¶29

Accordingly, I obtained the X-ray plates from the office of DHH Khordha and submitted a further injury requisition to the concerned Medical Officer along with the X-ray plates. The Medical Officer opined that Injury Nos. 1 and 2 are simple in nature and caused by hard and blunt objects, and Injury No. 3 is grievous in nature and caused by a hard and blunt object. The original injury opinion of the Medical Officer is attached herewith. Hence made prayer to the Hon'ble court to consider Section 118(2) BNS as per injury opinion in the above noted case.”

¶30

Page 3 of 5

¶31

It has also been stated in the instructions that the accused persons have been released under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and thereafter, charge sheet has been submitted on 30.04.2025 against 16 persons. But nothing is stated in the instructions about the other injured Jajati Keshori Udayasingh. The date when prayer was made to the Court to consider Section 118(2) of BNS as per injury opinion has also not been mentioned in the instructions.

¶32

Perusal of the case diary reveals that injury requisition has been submitted in favour of the Petitioner by the ASI twice, but it is not known as to why the medical officer who treated him and issued the injury reports has not been cited as a witness and his statement has not been recorded. There is no explanation in the instructions regarding non-examination of the other injured Jajati Kesari Udayasingh.

¶33

That apart, the Petitioner has sustained one injury in front of his ear while another injury on his head and it had been stated in the FIR that he had been assaulted on his head with deadly weapon.

¶34

8 Perusal of the final form / report reveals charge sheet no. 93 dated 30.04.2025 has been submitted against 16 persons. In the brief facts of the case, it is mentioned that notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS has been served on the accused persons with instruction to appear before the I.O., but strangely, it has not been mentioned that charge sheet has been submitted or against whom charge sheet has been submitted on the sections under which charge sheet has been submitted.

¶35

In view of the glaring irregularities in the investigation, I consider it fit to direct the Superintendent of Police, Khurda to

¶36

Page 4 of 5

¶37

assign the case to a senior officer for re-investigation of the case in accordance with law.

¶38

The officer who is to conduct investigation shall be nominated within a period of two weeks from date of receipt of this order.

¶39

With this observation, the CRLMP is disposed of.

¶40

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

¶41

Copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Khurda by the Registry forthwith.

¶42

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶43

Sukanta

¶44

Signature Not Verified

¶45

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 14-May-2026 20:09:07

¶46

Page 5 of 5

Subarna Kesharee Udaysingh v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subarna Kesharee Udaysingh 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

Sandhya Satpathy Vs State of Odisha

Photo Sahu Vs Purandar Sahu

Preetimayee Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Duryodhan Jena Vs State of Odisha

Sankar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Manasmita Das Vs Purna Chandra Das