Back
2026 Supreme(Ori) 675
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI, J.
Aswini Kumar Dash @ Chintu @ Chitu - Petitioners
Versus
State of Odisha & Anr. - Opposite Partys
CRLMC No. 5116 of 2025
Decided On : 13-02-2026
For the Petitioners: Mr. Devashis Panda, Sr. Adv. Along with Associates
For the Opposite Partys : Mrs. Sarita Moharana, ASC Mr. Saroj Ku. Padhy, Adv. (for victim)
The inquiry into allegations of sexual assault must recognize their societal impact, allowing prosecution to proceed and emphasizing the reliability of the victim's testimony and circumstances of dominance.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528 - Criminal Miscellaneous Case - Petition challenging order of cognizance and arrest - Allegations of sexual assault and threats made by Petitioner against victim, who was an employee under him - Petitioner alleged to have exploited his position and harbored criminal intent against prosecutrix by using undue influence. (Paras 1, 5, 8, 17)
(B) Inherent Jurisdiction - The Court emphasized the gravity of allegations involving sexual assault, determining that such cases cannot be treated as mere private disputes, as they have significant societal implications. (Para 8)
(C) Jurisdiction - The Court held that in instances of acts committed partially in different local areas, jurisdiction can be established in any relevant local area. (Para 11)
(D) FIR Requirements - It was explained that an FIR is not expected to detail all legal classifications and may omit specific terms as long as a cognizable offense is disclosed. (Para 14)
Facts of the case:
The Petitioner was accused of attempting to exert undue influence and sexually assaulting an employee, sending unsolicited gifts, and making criminal threats against her family, leading to his arrest based on a non-bailable warrant. (Paras 2, 6)
Findings of Court:
The Court affirmed that the allegations warranted a serious trial and the order of cognizance was properly issued as the evidence supported the victim's claims of coercion and sexual assault. The Court emphasized the necessity of allowing the legal process to continue. (Paras 17, 18)
Issues: The main issues included whether the order for cognizance could be quashed and the admissibility and implications of the allegations and evidence presented. (Paras 6, 8)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court stated that allegations of sexual assault carry considerable weight and must be taken seriously, particularly in employment relationships where power dynamics are at play, allowing decisions regarding the continuation of legal proceedings. (Paras 8, 17)
Result: CRLMC dismissed, with directions for the trial to proceed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual matrix of case leading to petition. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments against allegations. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's reasoning on jurisdiction and evidence. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. court's conclusion and dismissal of petition. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
Judgment :
Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.
1. The Petitioner has instituted the present Criminal Miscellaneous Case under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/ Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court. The Investigating Officer conducted the investigation in Tritol P.S. Case No. 431 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 520 of 2025. The F.I.R. was registered and thereafter, a preliminary charge-sheet was subsequently. Subsequently, the Petitioner was arrested in execution of a Non-Bailable Warrant.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
(i) The F.I.R. was lodged by the elder sister of the prosecutrix, alleging that the prosecutrix, was employed as an Accountant at ‘Ashutosh Associate’ at Jagatsingpur, which is stated to be owned by the Petitioner’s brother and, due to his ill-health, it was allegedly being managed by the Petitioner himself.
(ii) The Petitioner is married to the informant and is the father of a 14 years’ old son. It is alleged that the Petitioner harboured one- sided affection towards the informant’s sister and that, on 16.03.2023, he tried to be Romeo and he allegedly proposed his love to her.
(iii) After about four months of the prosecutrix joining the establishment, it is alleged that the Petitioner, having developed an interest on her, began to show undue attention and make over affectionate inquiry about her. It is further alleged that on 03.02.2025, on the occasion of the prosecutrix’s birthday, the petitioner sent a dress to her rented accommodation which was totally an unsolicited gesture.
(iv) It is further alleged that, with an intention to take undue advantage of the prosecutrix, the Petitioner included her in various teams and took her to different places on the pretext of office tours. It is further alleged that the petitioner assigned her excessive works with a view of keeping her in the office till late hours. The prosecutrix, feeling uncomfortable, has stated to have refused to accompany him.
(v) The Petitioner allegedly even sent a truck-load of luxury household items including an AC, inverter, dressing table, bed, Godrej almirah and washing machine to their rented house and also he transferred Rs. 3,60,000/- to the prosecutrix’s account in an unsolicited manner.
(vi) Thereafter, on a subsequent day, after consuming alcohol, the Petitioner called the prosecutrix to the office, abused her and asked to accompany him to a hotel. Upon her refusal, it is further alleged that he dragged her into the office room and attempted to choke her by pressing her neck.
(vii) On 20.08.2025, in the evening, the Petitioner, accompanied by five companions, arrived at the informant’s residence and verbally abused the informant and her mother. When the informant’s father stepped outside, the Petitioner allegedly pointed out a firearm at his head, causing him to flee back inside the house and lock the door in fear.
(viii) Thereafter, the investigation was conducted, the charge-sheet was filed, and the prosecutrix was examined. Her statement under Section 182 of BNS, 2023 was recorded, wherein she categorically narrated the commission of rape by the Petitioner. The informant, prosecutrix and other witnesses were also examined under Section 180 of BNSS, 2023, during which the prosecutrix reiterated the allegation of rape.
(ix) Pursuant thereto, the Petitioner was arrested on the basis of NBW. The learned Court took cognizance of the offence and committed the case to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur, for trial, whereupon C.T. Case No. 340 of 2025 was registered.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid facts an
