Orissa High Court
CRLMP/852/2026 of PRAMILA CHOUDHURY Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 15 July 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 852 of 2026 Pramila Choudhury … Petitioner Mr. S.K. Nayak, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Pradeep Kumar Das, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha, represented by its Secretary to Government of Odisha, Home Department, Lokaseva Bhawan,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMP No. 852 of 2026
Pramila Choudhury
…
Petitioner
Mr. S.K. Nayak, Advocate
on behalf of Mr. Pradeep Kumar Das, Advocate
-versus-
1. State of Odisha, represented by its
Secretary to Government of Odisha,
Home Department, Lokaseva Bhawan,
Bhubaneswar
2. Superintendent of Police, Bhadrak
3. IIC, Bhadrak Rural Police Station,
Bhadrak
4. Shankara @ Ugrasen Sahoo
…
Opp. Parties
Mr. S.K. Rout, ASC
CORAM:
HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Order No.
15.07.2026
01. (Through hybrid Mode)
1. Heard Mr. S.K. Nayak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Pradeep Kumar Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner.
2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- had been taken by Opposite Party No.4 for his treatment in the year, 2022 with an assurance to return the same with Bank interest within a period of six months to one year. After completion of one year, he did not return the money although the Petitioner and her nephew approached him puspa over mobile phone, but he abused them in filthy languages and threatened them with dire consequences saying that he will kidnap her and her daughter-in-law. Thereafter after three years, the Petitioner saw the Opposite Party No.4 roaming outside the house with ill intention for which she lodged a complaint before the IIC, Bhadrak Rural Police Station but no action was taken. Thereafter the Petitioner approached the S.P., Bhadrak through Registered Post requesting him to take effective steps but effective steps have not been taken.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the Petitioner and perusing the averments in the CRLMP, I am not inclined to exercise discretion power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. It is open to the Petitioner to avail the alternate remedy which is available to her under law, if so advised.
5. The CRLMP is accordingly disposed of.
6. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 15-Jul-2026 18:54:41 Signature Not Verified