Back
Viral Horror: Naked Dragging and Forced Chants Lead Orissa HC to Mandate DSP Probe Oversight
In a case that ignited outrage after a shocking video went viral, the has stepped in to ensure a fair investigation. Justice Savitri Ratho directed that a senior officer not below the rank of DSP supervise the probe into the brutal assault on Sk. Saharukh, a young Muslim man stripped, tied, dragged naked through streets, and coerced into chanting "Jay Sriram" . The petitioner's father, Sk. Hanif, sought escalation to the or a , highlighting the incident's communal undertones.
From Streets of Bahalda to High Court Doors
The nightmare unfolded in in Bahalda, Mayurbhanj district. On , a group allegedly assaulted Sk. Saharukh—son of petitioner Sk. Hanif—removed his clothes, tied his legs and hands with rope, dragged him while naked, and mocked him by forcing religious chants alien to his faith. A video captured the horror and was forwarded to 's IIC, with the FIR registered that day under .
By , the clip exploded across social media, amplifying calls for justice. Sk. Hanif filed CRLMP No. 283 of 2026, urging addition of . He argued the local police dragged their feet despite the video's evidence. Respondents included the , , , and .
Petitioner's Plea: Escalate or Risk Injustice
Sk. Hanif's counsel, , painted a vivid picture: the naked dragging, public humiliation, and forced chants as evidence of deeper crimes like organized assault and religious provocation. He noted the video was sent directly to the IIC pre-FIR, yet key sections remained absent. Compliance with court orders included a detailed synopsis underscoring the viral spread's impact.
Police Counter: Injuries 'Simple', Probe Ongoing
Additional Standing Counsel defended the local efforts. Medical opinion from CHC Bahalda deemed injuries
"simple in nature, caused by hard and blunt object"
within two hours of the assault. Two accused—Kunal Sahu and Santosh Kumar Sahu—were arrested, medically examined (no injuries found), and forwarded to court. No adverse antecedents emerged. He stressed the petitioner wasn't the informant or victim, and investigation continues with remaining suspects at large. Notably,
was dropped in charge sheet forwarding.
Court's Balancing Act: Supervision Without Full Handover
Justice Ratho weighed the viral video's undisputed existence against ongoing local probe. No officer was impleaded, limiting full transfer requests. Yet, the allegations' gravity—communal humiliation captured on camera—demanded oversight. She entertained the plea given the father's standing and noted procedural lapses like dropping .
The bench clarified no full handover to or SIT, but emphasized fairness:
"keeping in view the nature of the allegations and as it is not disputed that the incident had been videographed and made viral over social media, in the opinion of the Court that it would be proper if the investigation of the case is supervised by a Senior Officer not below the rank of DSP."
Key Observations from the Bench
"son of the Petitioner Sk. Saharukh had been assaulted by the accused persons and others and they had removed his clothes and dragged him on the surface, but tying his leg with the rope and thereafter tying his hand with the rope while he was still naked and made him mock on the road forcing him to utter 'Jay Sriram Jay Sriram' although he belongs to a different community"
"the injuries sustained on the person Md. Shahrukh @ Mahammad Sek Saruk are simple in nature and caused by hard and blunt object"
"the investigation of the case is supervised by a Senior Officer not below the rank of the post of DSP / SDPO to supervise the investigation of the case who shall insure that investigation is conducted in a "
"As the Petitioner is the father of the injured, even though he is not the informant, I am inclined to entertain the CRLMP."
Justice Served, Probe Elevated: Implications Ahead
The CRLMP stands disposed with a clear directive to : assign a DSP/SDPO for supervision, ensuring "" investigation and lawful final report. This sidesteps full escalation but signals courts' intolerance for mishandled high-profile, video-backed cases with communal edges.
For victims' kin, it's a win toward accountability; for police, a nudge for diligence amid public scrutiny. Future probes in viral hate incidents may increasingly invoke such oversight, balancing local autonomy with judicial vigilance.
