Orissa High Court
Santosh Kumar Jena vs State Of Orissa & Ors. ....... Opposite ... on 17 November, 2025
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 26661 of 2025
Santosh Kumar Jena ........ Petitioner(s)
Mr. Sarada Prasad Dash, Adv.
-Versus-
State of Orissa & Ors. ....... Opposite Party (s)
Mr. Sonak Mishra, ASC
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
ORDER
17.11.2025
Order No.
03.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with
the following prayer:
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that, this Hon'ble Court
may be graciously pleased to admit this writ petition and issue
rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties to show-cause as to
why
(i) the Opp. Parties shall not be directed to release the TATA INTRA
V 10 BS-6 bearing Regd. No.OD 09S 1135, Chassis
No.MAT535072LYF06744, Engine No.800CCD102EZXS30712
pursuant to the direction of the learned J.M.F.C., Thakurmunda on
dated 14.08.2025 in favour of the Petitioner.
(ii) The Erring officers who have violated order of the learned
magistrate shall not be exemplary punished.
(iii) There shall not be proper and adequate compensation to be
paid to the petitioner.
And if the opp. parties fail to show cause or show insufficient
cause this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit this writ
release the vehicle in favour of the petitioner for interest of
justice."
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner
being the owner of the vehicle had filed a petition before the
learned J.M.F.C., Thakurmunda to release the seized vehicle in
question in his favour. However, the learned J.M.F.C.,
Thakurmunda rejected the said petition. He further submits that
challenging the said order of rejection, the Petitioner had
approached this Court vide CRLREV No.386 of 2025 which was
disposed of on 29.07.2025 with a direction that in case there is
no such confiscation proceeding commenced with the issuance
of notice and appearance by the Petitioner by 13th June, 2025,
learned court below shall take judicial notice and to deal with
the application of the Petitioner under Section 503 of BNSS
regarding interim release of the seized vehicle in question.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that after
receipt of the order of this Court, learned J.M.F.C.,
Thakurmunda vide order dated 14.08.2025 directed the
Thakurmunda Range Office to release the seized vehicle in
favour of the Petitioner. However, the said Range Officer did
not comply the order of the learned Magistrate till today.
6. Learned counsel for the State submits that the order dated
14.08.2025 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Thakurmunda is
pending before the revisonal court i.e. Addl. District Judge,
Thakurmunda and the matter is at the stage of pronouncement
of the judgment.
7. In such view of the matter and considering the submission
made by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the
view that since the order passed by the learned J.M.F.C.,
Thakurmunda is pending before the revisional court i.e. A.D.J.,
Thakurmunda and the matter is at the stage of pronouncement
of the judgment, the Petitioner's prayer for release of the
aforesaid vehicle cannot be entertained at this stage.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Murmu
