[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Sishir Kanta Pati vs Minati Sethy & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 21 April, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.917 of 2026
Sishir Kanta Pati .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Biswanath Beherea, Adv.
-versus-
Minati Sethy & Anr. .... Opposite Party(s)
Mr. Sonak Mishra, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order No. ORDER
03. 21.04.2026
1.
This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. In filing the present CRLMC, the Petitioner from whose
house 50 grams of gold ornaments including cash of
Rs.30,000/- is claimed to have been stolen, has prayed
for quashing the impugned order dated 21.11.2025
passed by the learned S.D.J.M, Keonjhar in 1CC Case
No.25/2024.
3. Heard.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that on
23.06.2023 at about 5.00 P.M. taking advantage of
absence of the Petitioner and the other members of his
family in the house, the Opposite Parties had
committed theft of 50 grams of gold ornaments
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 23-Apr-2026 12:25:17
of the Petitioner. Upon getting information regarding
theft the Petitioner conducted search. On search, he
came to know that the theft was committed by the
Opposite Party No.1. He, accordingly, asked the
Opposite Party No.1 to return the said article including
cash of Rs.30,000/-. The Opposite Party No.1 had also
assured him to return the said articles including cash of
Rs.30,000/-. But, after some time since she refused to
return the said articles, the Petitioner lodged an F.I.R in
the local Police Station. Upon lodging of the F.I.R
necessary inquiry was conducted and the case was
registered as 1CC No.25 of 2024 before the Court of
learned S.D.J.M, Keonjhar.
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the Petitioner
submits that despite the best efforts of the Petitioner
and recording of the statement of the witness named
Trilochan Sethy, the learned S.D.J.M, Keonjhar rejected
the above noted 1CC Case without paying any attention
to the same vide impugned order dated 21.11.2025. He,
accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this
CRLMC.
6. In his opposition, learned counsel for the State submits
that upon initiation of the above noted Criminal
proceeding the learned S.D.J.M, Keonjhar had recorded
the statement of the vital witness named Trilochan
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 23-Apr-2026 12:25:17
Sethy. Upon recording of the statement of the above
noted witness and looking to the factual scenario of the
crime, the learned S.D.J.M rejected the case of the
Petitioner due to insufficiency of proof. He also
submits that the Petitioner was unable to establish a
prima facie case before the learned S.D.J.M, Kenojhar
despite providing of sufficient opportunity. Hence,
there is no flaw in the impugned order dated 21.11.2025
passed in the above noted 1CC Case. He, accordingly,
prays for dismissal of this CRLMC.
7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both
the parties and since the above noted 1CC case has been
rejected upon recording of statement of the vital
witness named Trilochan Sethy, this Court is of the
view that there is no flaw in the impugned order dated
21.11.2025 passed in the above noted 1CC Case.
8. This CRLMC is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Ayaskanta
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 23-Apr-2026 12:25:17
