Laxmi Kala Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Laxmi Kala Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No direction issued; the petitioner was left at liberty to avail the alternate remedy available to her under the law if aggrieved by the investigation or its result.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct Opposite Party No.3 to make a preliminary inquiry in respect of the written complaint made by the petitioner under Annexure-1, and direct Opposite Party No.2 to supervise the action taken by Opposite Party No.3 and take appropriate action against Opposite Party Nos. 5 and 6. +1 more

Court's answer

As the investigation of the case is being supervised by the Additional SP, Bhadrak, the Court held it unnecessary to direct for supervision of the case by the SP, Bhadrak.

Ratio / Principle

As investigation is in progress, the Court did not find it necessary to issue any direction for the arrest of Opposite Party Nos. 5 and 6.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the investigation or its result, she is at liberty to avail the alternate remedy available to her under the law; on this observation the CRLMP stands disposed of.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ORISSA HIGH COURT AT CUTTACK — CRLMP No. 75 of 2026 (Hon'ble Miss Justice Savitri Ratho) — Laxmi Kala v. State of Odisha, Superintendent of Police Bhadrak, Inspector-in-charge Bansada Bhadrak, Ramakanta Giri and Bimala Giri (decision dated 17.02.2026). The petitioner sought a direction to Opposite Party No.3 to make a preliminary inquiry into her written complaint (Annexure-1), supervision of the action taken by Opposite Party No.2, and appropriate action against Opposite Party Nos. 5 and 6. Pursuant to the Court's order dated 05.02.2026, the Additional Standing Counsel produced the instruction dated 15.02.2026 of the IIC, Bansada Police Station, recording that investigation of the case is in progress, is likely to be completed within a few days, and is being supervised by the Additional SP, Bhadrak, with the neighbours unable so far to prove the allegations against Ramakanta Giri and Bimala Giri. Holding that supervision by the Additional SP made a direction for supervision by the SP, Bhadrak unnecessary, and that no direction for arrest of Opposite Party Nos. 5 and 6 was called for while investigation was in progress, the Court disposed of the CRLMP observing that the petitioner, if aggrieved by the investigation or its result, is at liberty to avail the alternate remedy available to her under the law. No precedents cited; no statutory provisions construed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CRLMP No. 75 of 2026

Laxmi Kala

Petitioner

Mr. Amit Kumar Patra, Advocate

-versus-

1.State of Odisha 2.Superintendent of Police, Bhadrak 3. Inspector-in-charge, Bansada, Bhadrak 4. Ramakanta Giri Opposite Parties 5. Bimala Giri ….. Mr. Sarathi Jyoti Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel

CORAM:

HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER

17.02.2026

Order No.

(Through hybrid Mode)

This CRLMP has been filed for a direction to Opposite Party No.3 to make preliminary inquiry in respect of written complaint made by the petitioner under Annexure-1 and Opposite Party No. 2 to supervise the action taken by the Opposite Party No.3 and take appropriate action against Opposite Party No.5 and 6.

Pursuant to order dated 05.02.2026, Mr. S. J. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel has produced the instruction dated 15.02.2026 of the IIC, Bansada Police Station who has given details of the steps taken by him for investigation, where it is also stated that during investigation the neighbours could not prove the allegation against the Ramakanta Giri and Bimala Giri so far and that investigation of the case is in progress and is likely to be completed within a few days and it is being supervised by the Additional SP, Bhadrak.

Page 1 of 2

As the investigation is being supervised by the Additional SP, Bhadrak, this Court is of the view that it is not necessary to direct for supervision of the case by the SP, Bhadrak.

As investigation is in progress, this Court also does not find it necessary to issue any direction to arrest of Opposite Party No. 5 and 6.

The CRLMP is therefore disposed of observing that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the investigation or its result, she is at liberty to avail the alternate remedy which is available to her under the law.

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

Subhalaxmi

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHALAXMI PRIYADARSHANI SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 18-Feb-2026 11:38:04

Page 2 of 2