Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Harihar Jena Vs State and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2026)

Home
Orissa HC
2026
Harihar Jena Vs State and Ors.Harihar Jena v. State and Ors.

Dismissed

Harihar Jena v. State and Ors.

Orissa HC10 Sept 2026WP(C)/12784/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition for habeas corpus dismissed as infructuous due to efflux of time, with counsel filing a memo to that effect.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's writ petition dismissed for being infructuous.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.12784 of 2013 CNR No. ODHC010215762013

Harihar Jena and others

..... Petitioners

Mr. Sachi Ranjan Behera, Proxy Counsel On behalf of Mr. J. Pradhan, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha and others

..... Opposite Parties

Mr. Manas Ranjan Mohanty, AGA

CORAM:

MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

ORDER

10.09.2026

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Harihar Jena and others
respondent
State of Odisha and others

Coram

AI extract

SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Orissa HC
Decided on: 10 Sept 2026 · September
Registered: 10 Jun 2013
Case no.: WP(C)/12784/2013

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

Cite this judgement

Harihar Jena v. State and Ors., WP(C)/12784/2013 (OD), decided on 10 September 2026.

The High Court of Orissa publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Petitioner's writ petition dismissed for being infructuous.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition for habeas corpus was dismissed as infructuous. The learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo stating the prayer has become infructuous by efflux of time. The writ petition stands dismissed with no substantive issue addressed.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

Order No.

03.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Mr. Behera, learned Proxy Counsel, on behalf of Mr. J. Pradhan, learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits, by efflux of time, the prayer made in the writ petition has become infructuous. He files a Memo to the said effect in the Court bearing signature of Mr. J. Pradhan, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, which is taken on record.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as

infructuous.

4. Pending I.A.(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.

Kanhu

(S.K. Mishra)

Judge

Signature Not Verified Page 1 of 1 . Digitally Signed Signed by: KANHU BEHERA Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 11-Sep-2026 18:53:14

CNR

ODHC010215762013

Topic

Writ and Judicial Review

Disposal

Disposed Off