Ram Prasad Meher vs State Of Odisha
2026 Latest Caselaw 3023 Ori

Orissa High Court

Ram Prasad Meher vs State Of Odisha on 30 March, 2026

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                CRLMP No. 292 of 2026
                 Ram Prasad Meher                         ....       Petitioner

                                       Mr. Arjuna Charana Behera, Advocate
                                          -versus-
                 1. State of Odisha, represented though
                 its Principal Secretary to Govt.
                 Department of Home, Bhubaneswar
                 2. Superintendent of Police, Bargarh
                 3. Inspector in Charge (IIC), Barpali
                 Police Station                         ....       Opp. Parties

                                                 Mr. Sarathi Jyoti Mohanty,
                                                Additional Standing Counsel

             CORAM:
                  HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
                           ORDER

Order No.                 30.03.2026
                               (Through hybrid Mode)

  03.       1.      This CRLMP has been filed for a direction to the Opposite

Parties No. 2 and 3 to register a case on the basis of FIR

submitted by the Petitioner before the Opposite Party No. 3 on

14.01.2026.

2. On 20.03.2026, this Court had directed as follows:-

"5. This Court is not very concerned whether any case is registered by the Police against the accused persons. But the practice of social boycott is a pernicious practice which cannot be tolerated. It is therefore duty of the Police to ensure that no inhabitant of the village is harassed or excommunicated for any reason

especially the reason that a member of the family has married outside the caste. Excommunication on the questions of marrying outside the caste cannot be tolerated under any circumstances.

6. A cognizable offence of extortion apart from other cognizable offences is made out from the contents of the CRLMP. This Court can direct for registration of the FIR.

7. But this Court feels that it would be in the interest of justice, if the I.I.C., Barpali Police Station makes an attempt to amicably settle this problem in the village, so that there is no necessity for lodging any FIR against the villagers.

8. Instead of taking the plea of non-receipt of any written complaint, since the Opposite Parties No.2 and 3 are now aware of the allegations of the Petitioner, they should take steps for resolving the problem.

9. List this case on 30.03.2026 to enable Mr. Ashok Kumar Apat, learned Additional Government Advocate to obtain instructions as regards the action taken by the I.I.C., Barpali Police Station in the meanwhile, pursuant to this order of this Court."

3. Today, Mr. Sarathi Jyoti Mohanty, learned Additional

Standing Counsel produces the instructions dated 28.03.2026 of

the I.I.C., Barpali Police Station, where it is stated that he

convened a meeting of Sarpanches of three Gram Panchayat,

villagers and both the parties. During investigation it came to

light that as the daughter of the Petitioner had eloped with a boy

of another caste, they had been declared an outcaste by their

community (Bhulia) and were boycotted in social functions of

their community. On 05.02.2024, the boycott was revoked

imposed by the community at a district level meeting. In the

meeting held on 28.03.2026, both the parties settled the issue

amicably and at present there is no dispute between them and

boycott is no more in force. The Petitioner stated that there was

no incident occurred against him or his wife on 14.01.2026.

He has not submitted any report in Hon'ble Court and the

signature put on the petition is not his signature. The proceeding

of the meeting have been reduced to writing.

4. Mr. Arjuna Charana Behera, learned counsel for the

Petitioner files a memo to withdraw this CRLMP stating that the

Petitioner does not want to proceeding with this case as the

disputes have been resolved among the parties in the presence of

the police of Barpali Police Station on 28.03.2026. The memo is

taken on record.

5. Considering the said submission, the CRLMP is disposed

of as withdrawn.

6. The police had been directed to take steps for resolving the

matter amicably on the basis of the CRLMP filed by the

Petitioner - Ram Prasad Meher. Appreciating the action of the

police in resolving the dispute, the matter would have been set to

rest. But it has been stated in the instructions that the Petitioner

has stated before the police that there was no incident occurred

against him or his wife on 14.01.2026 and he has not submitted

any report in this Court and the signature put on the petition is

not his signature. As this statement has serious ramifications, it is

therefore directed that the Petitioner shall remain physically

present in Court on the next date i.e. on 21.04.2026 to confirm

whether the signatures in the CRLMP (affidavit) and in the

Vakalatnama are his or not. The physical file be sent to the Court

by the Registry.

7. This Court will consider whether it is necessary to direct

for the personal appearance of the I.I.C., Barpali Police Station

and/or direct for an enquiry, after hearing the Petitioner.

(Savitri Ratho) Judge Sukanta

Signed by: SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication

Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 30-Mar-2026 20:30:44