Odisha: Court warns IIC of punitive action for repeatedly defying its orders  

CUTTACK:  The Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Salepur, on Saturday rejected the time petition filed by investigating officer and Mahanga IIC Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and issued a showcause notice to him for not appearing before it and repeatedly seeking more time to file the status report on reinvestigation into the double murder case and collection of call detail records (CDRs) of the three accused.

The court issued the showcause notice to Mohanty under section 171 of Indian Evidence Act and section 311 of CrPC and asked him why coercive and punitive action should not be taken against him as per CrPC for repeatedly  defying its orders.

The court directed Mohanty to submit the up-to-date case diary as called for and the report regarding action taken by him for collecting and preserving CDRs as directed on or before 10 am of December 10 failing which the matter shall be viewed as willful disregard to abide by its direction and intentional violation of the Criminal Procedure Code. 

The court had on Friday concluded the hearing on personal appearance of the IIC who had sought 30 more days for submission of case diary and action taken report on collection and preservation of CDRs and reserved the verdict. But Mohanty chose to remain absent and filed another prayer though APP wherein he stated that due to the ramification involved in the case, the orders of the court were being examined at higher level of the State and such examination has raised questions on the correctness and legality of the orders passed by the court. 

Mohanty said the matter has to be carried to higher courts while seeking 30 days to obtain appropriate orders regarding the same. While the assistant public prosecutor was asked whether any order has been obtained by the IIC to stay the direction of the court of JMFC, Salepur, nothing was submitted in this regard.

“It appears that the IO has himself sat in judgement over the correctness and propriety of the orders passed by the court and decided to willfully disregard the direction passed by the court on November 18 and November 25 for collection and preservation of CDRs and submission of up to date case diary,” the court observed.  

“The investigating officer has sought time based on his futuristic actions of obtaining appropriate orders from higher courts and till then he has kept the orders of this court in abeyance. This amounts to willful and deliberate contempt of the orders of this court. Let the matter be reported to the higher authority for appropriate departmental action,” the court remarked in its order.