SURYAKANTA BARIK vs STATE OF ODISHA — CRLMP/338/2026

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 227. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010138702026

e-Filing Number

20-02-2026

Filing Number

CRLMP/5871/2026

Filing Date

20-Feb-2026

Registration No

CRLMP/338/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Judge

Miss Justice Savitri Ratho

Coram

Miss Justice Savitri Ratho

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 9 )

Sub-Category

ANY OTHER MATTER UNDER CR.P.C. ( 21 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 09-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India, 1950 Section 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SURYAKANTA BARIK

    Adv. SATYA NARAYAN MISHRA 4

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ODISHA

  2. 2.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KORAPUT

  3. 3.I.I.C, SUNABEDA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    Fresh Admission 1

    Miss Justice Savitri Ratho

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Miss Justice Savitri RathoView PDF

    Summary The Orissa High Court noted that the petitioner filed a complaint alleging cognizable offences against Subhakanta Nayak and Jitu Bagh on 14.01.2026, and subsequently submitted a representation to the Superintendent of Police on 08.02.2026, but no FIR was registered despite acknowledgment. The court adjourned the case to 06.04.2026 to allow the Additional Standing Counsel to obtain instructions from the police regarding the complaint. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Miss Justice Savitri Ratho

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Miss Justice Savitri RathoView PDF

  6. 23-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 20-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLMP/338/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Orissa High Court noted that the petitioner filed a complaint alleging cognizable offences against Subhakanta Nayak and Jitu Bagh on 14.01.2026, and subsequently submitted a representation to the Superintendent of Police on 08.02.2026, but no FIR was registered despite acknowledgment. The court adjourned the case to 06.04.2026 to allow the Additional Standing Counsel to obtain instructions from the police regarding the complaint. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case