Alekha Chandra Mallick vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 9003 Ori

Orissa High Court

Alekha Chandra Mallick vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 13 October, 2025

Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi

Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi

                                         // 1 //




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                          W.P.(C) No.27938 of 2025
        Alekha Chandra Mallick                 ....               Petitioner(s)
                                              Mr. Bibhuti Keshari Biswal, Adv.
                                      -versus-

        State of Odisha & Anr.             ....              Opposite Party(s)

                                                      Mr. Pravakar Behera, SC
                                                   (for Transport Department)

                CORAM:
                DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI


                                  ORDER

Order                            13.10.2025
No.

01. 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:

"Therefore, the petitioner most respectfully prays that, this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased enough to admit this writ petition, issue rule NISI, calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the VCRs under Annexure-2 series issued/drawn against the Vehicle of the petitioner bearing Regd. No. OR19F7177 shall not be transmitted the to the Court of learned J.M.F.C.(Transport), Cuttack for disposal of the same as

// 2 //

per law. And if the opposite parties did not show cause or show insufficient cause the rule may be made absolute by issuing appropriate writ directing the O.P.No.2 to transmit/forward the VCRs under Annexure-2series to the Court of learned J.M.F.C.(Transport), Cuttack within a stipulated time."

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that this Court has

earlier decided the similar issue in the judgment dated 15.01.2014

passed in W.P.(C) No.1500 of 2004 (Anjana Babulal Darabad vrs.

Commissioner, S.T.A. & Ors.) and batch of Writ Petitions. Hence,

he submits that this Writ Petition may be disposed of in the light

of the judgment passed in the case of Anjana Babulal (supra).

5. Learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department

submits that the most of the VCRs under Annexure-2 series are

drawn up against the vehicle are more than one year before. As

per Section 514 of the BNSS, 2023 there is bar for taking

cognizance of the offence where the imprisonment is provided

not exceeding one year. Hence the Magistrate cannot take

cognizance of offence under the e-Challan.

6. In view of the above, let the Petitioner shall approach the

concerned Transport Authority to compound the offence. In such

event, the Authority shall do the needful to consider the same as

// 3 //

per law within a period of fifteen days from the date of

presentation of a certified copy of this order.

7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Sumitra

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack