Disposed¶21

Asish Kumar Rout v. Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur

Orissa HC8 Jan 2026WP(C)/308/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.308 of 2026; decided 08.01.2026 by Dr. Justice Sanjeeb K Panigrahi; Ashish Kumar Rout v. Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur & Ors.; release of detained tipper OD-05-BH-6677 held by Raghunathpur Police Station and Mining Officer, Jagatsinghpur; writ petition disposed with liberty/direction to petitioner to approach detaining authorities within ten days for release of vehicle as per law; vehicle detention; mining/police seizure; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions to the petitioner to approach the Inspector-in-Charge, Raghunathpur Police Station and the Mining Officer, Jagatsinghpur with all required documents within ten days, upon which OP No.2 is to examine the grievance and release the vehicle as per law. ¶21

Asish Kumar Rout Vs Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct release of the petitioner's tipper vehicle bearing registration No.OD-05-BH-6677, detained by the Inspector-in-Charge, Raghunathpur Police Station and the Mining Officer, Jagatsinghpur. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

The Court directs the petitioner to approach the Inspector-in-Charge, Raghunathpur Police Station (OP No.2) and the Mining Officer, Jagatsinghpur (OP No.3) with all the required documents for release of his vehicle within ten days.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Upon such approach, the Opposite Party No.2 shall look into the petitioner's grievance and release the above-noted vehicle as per law.

¶20

Key takeaways

Taking into account the submissions of both sides and the factual scenario, the Court adopted the course of directing the petitioner to seek release through the detaining authorities rather than adjudicating the release itself.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, single judge), W.P.(C) No.308 of 2026, Ashish Kumar Rout v. Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur & Ors., order dated 08.01.2026: The petitioner, owner of tipper vehicle Regn. No.OD-05-BH-6677 detained by the Inspector-in-Charge, Raghunathpur Police Station (OP No.2) and the Mining Officer, Jagatsinghpur (OP No.3), sought a writ direction for its release. Counsel for the State submitted that the petitioner should first have approached the Inspector-in-Charge at the threshold. Accepting the petitioner's prayer to do so and considering the submissions and factual scenario, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to approach OP Nos.2 and 3 with all required documents within ten days, whereupon OP No.2 was to look into the grievance and release the vehicle as per law. No statute or precedent was cited; no quantum involved.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.308 of 2026

¶3

Ashish Kumar Rout

¶4

..…... Petitioner(s)

¶5

Mr.Braja Mohan Sarangi, Adv.

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur & Ors. ……. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Bibekananda Nayak, AGA

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI

ORDER

08.01.2026

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶15

In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner being the owner of the vehicle in question bearing registration No.OD-05-BH-6677 (Tipper) has sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3 for releasing the said vehicle which has been detained by the Inspector-in-Charge, Raghunathpur Police Station/ Opposite Party No.2 and the Mining Officer, Jagatsinghpur/Opposite Party No.3.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶17

¶18

Learned counsel for the State, at the outset, submits that in order to redress his grievance the Petitioner instead of preferring this Writ Petition should have approached the Inspector-in-Charge, Raghunathpur Police Station/Opposite Party No.2 at the threshold of the matter.

¶19

At this juncture, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for granting permission to the Petitioner to do so.

¶20

Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and looking to the factual scenario of the case, this Court directs the Petitioner to approach the Inspector-in-Charge, Raghunathpur Police Station/Opposite Party No.2 and the Mining Officer, Jagatsinghpur/Opposite Party No.3 along with all the required documents for release of his vehicle in question within a period of ten days hence. In such event, the Opposite Party No.2 shall look into the grievance of the Petitioner and release the above noted vehicle of the Petitioner as per law.

¶21

This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Sumitra Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 09-Jan-2026 18:15:03

¶24

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)

¶25

Judge

Asish Kumar Rout v. Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asish Kumar Rout v. Superintendent of Police, Jagatsinghpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd., Mumbai Vs District Magistrate and Collector, Puri

Amalendu Dash Vs State of Odisha

Nirmala Das Vs the Sub Collector, Jagatsinghpur

Uma Charan Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Srikrushna Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Bhramarbar Behera Vs State of Odisha