CRLMP/750/2026 of UMAMANI NAYAK Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 23 June 2026

ORDER

23.06.2026

01. (Through Hybrid Mode)

1. This CRLMP has been filed with the following prayer:-

“Therefore, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to admit this Writ Petition Criminal, issue rule NISI, for calling upon the opp. Parties particularly opp. Party Nos.2 and 3 for show cause as to why the direction will not be issued for registration for registration of the complaint sent by the petitioner through speed post on 01.06.2026 against the accused person and investigate thereupon. This Hon'ble Court may make its rule absolute if the said Opp. Parties fail to submit show cause or show insufficient cause, after hearing from the parties, this Hon'ble Court may direct in the writ of mandamus to the Opp. party No.3 to register the complaint sent by the petitioner through speed post on 01.06.2026 against the accused person and conclude the investigation proceeding by taking coercive action against the accused person for the interest of justice.

This Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct any other direction(s), pass any other appropriate writ(s), Order(s) as this Hon'ble court may fit just and proper for the ends of justice and equity as this case in question;

And for this act of kindness the petitioner is in duty bound shall ever pray.”

2. The Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage : (2016) 6 SCC 277, has observed as follows:- “2. This Court has held in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P (2008) 2 SCC 409, AIR 2008 SC 907, that if a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or having been registered, proper investigation is not being done, then the remedy of the aggrieved person is not to go to the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) CrPC. If such an application under Section 156(3) CrPC is made and the Magistrate is, prima facie, satisfied, he can direct the FIR to be registered, or if it has already been registered, he can direct proper investigation to be done which includes in his discretion, if he deems it necessary, recommending change of the investigating officer, so that a proper investigation is done in the matter. We have said this in Sakiri Vasu case (2008) 2 SCC 409, AIR 2008 SC 907 because what we have found in this country is that the High Courts have been flooded with writ petitions praying for registration of the first information report or praying for a proper investigation.

3. We are of the opinion that if the High Courts entertain such writ petitions, then they will be flooded with such writ petitions and will not be able to do any other work except dealing with such writ petitions. Hence, we have held that the complainant must avail of his alternate remedy to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) CrPC and if he does so, the Magistrate will ensure, if prima facie he is satisfied, registration of the first information report and also ensure a proper investigation in the matter, and he can also monitor the investigation.”

3. After hearing Mr. S.K. Parida, learned counsel for the Petitioner, perusing the averments in the CRLMP and Annexures, and in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe (supra), the CRLMP is disposed of granting liberty to the Petitioner to avail the alternate remedy which is available to him under law.

4. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

(Savitri Ratho)

Judge

RKS Digitally Signed Signed by: RANJAN KUMAR SETHI Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 24-Jun-2026 19:22:30 Signature Not Verified