Jayanti Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Jayanti Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to Opposite Party No.2 to dispose of M.C. No. 04 of 2025 expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments, if there is no other legal impediment; and liberty to Opposite Party No.3 to approach the Court for variation/modification/recall of this order.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing Opposite Party No.2 (Sub-Collector-cum-SubDivisional Magistrate, Jeypore) to properly exercise jurisdiction in Criminal Misc. Case No. 04 of 2025 pending under Section 164 of the BNSS, 2023. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Considering the petitioner's submission, the Court disposed of the CRLMP by directing Opposite Party No.2 to dispose of M.C. No. 04 of 2025 expeditiously, without granting unnecessary adjournments, if there is no other legal impediment to taking up the matter.

Key takeaways

Because the application was disposed of without issuing notice to Opposite Party No.3, liberty was granted to Opposite Party No.3 to approach this Court for variation/modification/recall of this order in case any averment of the petitioner is not correct or relevant facts have been suppressed.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRLMP No. 703 of 2026, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, decided 17.06.2026 (Savitri Ratho, Vacation Judge, sole member and author). Jayanti Sahu v. State of Odisha, Sub-Collector-cum-SubDivisional Magistrate Jeypore (OP-2), Kesab Das Pattanayak, Pushpanjali Panigrahi and Chandan Sahoo (OPs 3-5). Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing OP-2 to properly exercise jurisdiction in Criminal Misc. Case No. 04 of 2025 dated 28.04.2025, pending under Section 164 of the BNSS, 2023, and to dispose of it within a stipulated, time-bound period. Annexure-6 showed that on 16.05.2025 the SDM, Jeypore issued notice to the second-party members to show cause by 30.05.2025 and directed both parties to maintain status quo; thereafter the SDM was transferred and the matter lay untouched, a new SDM having since been posted. The Court disposed of the petition, directing OP-2 to dispose of the M.C. expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments if no legal impediment exists, and, as no notice had gone to OP-3, granted him liberty to seek variation/modification/recall of the order. Only statute cited: S. 164 BNSS, 2023. No precedent cases cited. No monetary amounts involved.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 703 of 2026

Jayanti Sahu ….. Petitioner

Mr. Lingaraj Mohanty, Advocate

-versus-

1.State of Odisha 2.The Sub-Collector-cum-SubDivisional Magistrate, Jeypore 3.Kesab Das Pattanayak 4.Pushpanjali Panigrahi 5. Chandan Sahoo

….. Opp. Parties Mr. Jateswar Nayak, A.G.A.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

17.06.2026

Order No.

(through virtual Mode)

This CRLMP has been filed for issue of writ of mandamus

directing Opposite Party No.2 to properly exercise jurisdiction in

Criminal Misc. Case No. 04 of 2025 dated 28.04.2025 pending

under Section 164 of the BNSS, 2023 and directing the Opposite Party No.2 to dispose of the proceeding within a stipulated and timebound period as may be deemed just and proper.

Perusal of Annexure-6 reveals that on 16.05.2025 while issuing notice to the 2^nd party members to show cause by 30.05.2025, the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Jeypore had directed both

Page 1 of 2

parties to maintain status quo.

Mr. L. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of the transfer of the Sub-divisional Magistrate (in short, “SDM”), after 30.05.2025, the matter has not been taken up nor have any orders been passed in the case. He further submits that in the meanwhile, another officer has been posted as SDM in Jeypore for which there should be no difficulty for the matter to be taken up and disposed of in accordance with law without further delay.

Considering the said submission, the CRLMP is disposed of directing the Opposite Party No.2 to dispose of the M.C. No. 04 of 2025 expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments, if there is no other legal impediment for taking up the matter.

Since this application is disposed of without issuing notice to the Opposite Party No.3, liberty is granted to the Opposite Party No.3 to approach this Court for variation /modification /recall of this order in case, any of the averments of the petitioner are not correct or relevant facts have been suppressed.

(Savitri Ratho) Vacation Judge

Signature Not Verified Subhalaxmi

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHALAXMI PRIYADARSHANI SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 17-Jun-2026 19:58:28

Page 2 of 2