Orissa High Court
CRLMP/741/2026 of SONALI MOHAPATRA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 23 June 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 741 of 2026 Sonali Mohapatra …. Petitioner Mr. Pramod Chandra Sejpada, Advocate -versus- 1.State of Odisha 2. The DCP, Cuttack UPD 3. The IIC, Lalbag Police Station, Cuttack UPD 4. The Investigating Officer, Lalbag Police Station,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMP No. 741 of 2026
Sonali Mohapatra
….
Petitioner
Mr. Pramod Chandra Sejpada, Advocate
-versus-
1.State of Odisha
2.The DCP, Cuttack UPD
3.The IIC, Lalbag Police Station,
Cuttack UPD
4. The Investigating Officer, Lalbag
Police Station, Cuttack UPD
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. Sarathi Jyoti Mohanty,
Additional Standing Counsel
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.
01. 23.06.2026
(Through hybrid Mode)
1. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in CRLMP No. 249 of 2026 and CRLMP No. 610 of 2026. It is stated in the certificate that CRLMP No. 610 of 2026 was on a different context and has been disposed of on 15.05.2026.
2. On perusal of the order dated 15.05.2026 passed in CRLMC NO. 610 of 2026 which is available in the website of the High Court, it is found that this Petitioner had prayed before this Court for arresting the accused persons and producing them in Court for realization of arrear amount of Rs.1,00,000/- within a stipulated time.
3. In this application it has been prayed to direct the Opposite Party No.2 to dispose the grievance petition submitted by the petitioner on 25.05.2026 before the DCP, Cuttack for realisation of arrear amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from the destitute Petitioner. (It is obvious that there is a typographical error in the prayer as the Petitioner could not have prayed for realisation of arrear amount from her). The police can always seize the said amount during investigation if it is found that it belongs to the Petitioner. But prayer for realisation of the arrear amount is misconceived.
4. I do not consider it necessary to issue any direction to the Opposite Party No.2 to dispose of the grievance petition, but the Petitioner is at liberty to pursue disposal of her petition which she has stated to have submitted before the Opposite Party No.2.
5. The CRLMP is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Subhalaxmi
Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHALAXMI PRIYADARSHANI SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 24-Jun-2026 20:01:36 Signature Not Verified