HIMANSU SEKHAR JENA vs STATE OF ODISHA — CRLMP /355/2026

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 08th April 2026.

CNR: ODHC010153882026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

CRLMP /6454/2026

Filing Date

26-02-2026

Registration No

CRLMP /355/2026

Registration Date

11-03-2026

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

08th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

HIMANSU SEKHAR JENA

Adv. TAPAS KUMAR DWIBEDI,G.C.MOHANTY,G.C.MOHANTY, G.C.MOHANTY

Respondent(s)

STATE OF ODISHA

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ODISHA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CUTTACK

INSPECTOR INCHARGE, JAGATPUR POLICE STATION

SUNIL KUMAR BEHERA @ SANDHA

HUMAYAN HYDER ALI KHAN @ HAPI

AKASH BISWAL @ MUNA

Hearing History

Judge: MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

23-03-2026

FRESH ADMISSION

08-04-2026

FRESH ADMISSION 1

07-04-2026

FOR ORDERS - CORRECTION OF TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS

07-04-2026

FRESH ADMISSION 1

24-03-2026

FRESH ADMISSION

Orders

08-04-2026
MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

The High Court of Orissa dismissed the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, finding that investigation and charge sheet filing were properly conducted with two accused charged under BNS sections 126(2), 115(2), 296, and 3(5), supported by witness testimony confirming only two assailants. The court granted the petitioner liberty to challenge the charge sheet before the appropriate forum if aggrieved, as that remedy is available under law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa dismissed the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, finding that investigation and charge sheet filing were properly conducted with two accused charged under BNS sections 126(2), 115(2), 296, and 3(5), supported by witness testimony confirming only two assailants. The court granted the petitioner liberty to challenge the charge sheet before the appropriate forum if aggrieved, as that remedy is available under law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case