Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Parbati Majhi vs The State Of Odisha on 20 May, 2026
Author: Pankaj Mithal
Bench: Pankaj Mithal
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (Crl.) NO.150 OF 2025
PARBATI MAJHI AND ANR. PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ODISHA AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
ORDER
1. The petitioners who are two sisters from
Odisha, are present in court.
2. Heard Ms. Suja Joshi, learned Amicus
Curiae, appointed to assist the Court on
behalf of the two petitioners and Mr.
Anjuman Tripathy, learned Advocate-on-
Record for the State. Mr. S.D. Sanjay,
learned ASG appeared on earlier occasions
and apprised us about the report of the
District Magistrate, Central Delhi.
3. This writ petition has been filed by the
petitioners under Article 32 of the
Signature Not Verified Constitution of India demanding
Digitally signed by
GEETA AHUJA
registration of FIR, protection of their
Date: 2026.05.21
16:52:42 IST
Reason:
life and property and transfer of the
investigation to CBI.
4. It appears from the facts as culled out
from the pleadings on record that the
grandfather of the petitioners was a
freedom fighter who died in jail during the
British period. Their father Dasarath Majhi
was in the village police. It is alleged
that on 05.06.2016, he was brutally beaten
and was thrown in the forest. He was
recovered from the forest and was
hospitalized. He ultimately succumbed to
his injury on 06.12.2016. It appears that
the petitioners are not in good terms with
their elder sister Padma Majhi. The said
elder sister allegedly with the aid of some
political persons forcibly took away the
dead body of their father and cremated the
same. Thus, denying the petitioners, the
right to cremate their father.
5. The elder sister of the petitioner lodged
complaints/FIRs against the petitioners and
in retaliation petitioners have also made
complaints against her.
6. Further, it is alleged that the petitioners
were dispossessed from their family
property.
7. The High Court of Orissa took suo moto
action in the matter vide Writ Petition
(PIL) No.5035 of 2019. The High Court vide
order dated 27.02.2019 directed the State
authorities to ensure that the land of the
petitioners is restored to their
possession. It further directed that
petitioners be provided police protection
and necessary facilities so that they may
live a normal life. Finally, the said Writ
Petition was disposed of on 05.08.2019 with
liberty to the petitioners to apply for
their discharge before the trial court in
the pending criminal cases alleged to have
been initiated by their elder sister. The
High Court also gave liberty to the
petitioners to revive the PIL in case they
faced any difficulty within 30 days.
8. The petitioners in pursuance of the above
directions never applied for discharge
before the trial court. They never made any
efforts even to revive the writ petition.
This Court also gave opportunity to the
petitioners to avail the above remedies but
despite repeated counseling by the Amicus
Curiae, they failed to avail any of the
above remedies.
9. Thus, in the above facts and circumstances,
in order to ensure that justice is meted
out to petitioners, this Court not only
appointed Amicus Curiae but also directed
the Koraput District Legal Services
Authority to collect complete information
regarding the alleged incidents narrated by
the petitioners. The petitioners were
permitted to approach the Koraput District
Legal Services Authority or any other
concerned District Legal Services
Authority, however, it appears that the
petitioners never approached the District
Legal Services Authority and as such, no
report in this regard has come on record.
10. Simultaneously, this Court had directed the
State counsel to seek instructions
regarding the properties owned by the
father of the petitioners, late Dasarath
Majhi and in connection with FIR No.43 of
2020. The State was directed to file
affidavit clearly stating the status of
various criminal cases in which the
petitioners are involved.
11. In pursuance of the above directions, the
State has filed affidavit on 14.07.2025. It
is stated in the said affidavit that late
Dasarath Majhi, the father of the
petitioners, hailed from Koraput district.
He belonged to Rana caste. He was married
to late Smt. Subarna Nayak. They had three
daughters; the petitioners and the eldest
Padma Majhi. He had inherited about seven
acres of landed properties on which he had
Nilgiri and Cashew plantations. During the
lifetime of the petitioners’ father, the
eldest daughter Padma Majhi married a
scheduled tribe boy, outside her caste.
Therefore, the Rana community objected to
it and socially boycotted late Dasarath
Majhi whereupon he left his village. He
constructed a house on a government plot in
Lamtaput district where he started living
with his family. Some time in the last week
of November 2016, he was admitted to
Asa Kiran Hospital at Lamtaput district
owning to old age ailments. He died during
treatment at 3:50 pm on 05.12.2016 and not
on 06.12.2016 as alleged by the
petitioners. The petitioners brought the
dead body of their father to their house
and locked it. When the news of his death
came to be known to the villagers and
relatives, upon the intervention of the
local police, his funeral commenced as per
customs of Rana Community. There was some
scuffle at that time between the
petitioners and their elder sister Padma
Majhi who ultimately with the help of
relatives took the body to the burial
ground of their native village Barengaguda
and completed the funeral. This caused the
petitioners to flee from their village
making all sorts of allegations against
everyone. It is also stated that the
petitioners filed two FIRs i.e. FIR No.75
of 2016 dated 15.12.2016 under Sections 379
and 34 of IPC and FIR No.77 of 2016 dated
18.12.2016 under Sections 341, 323, 354,
506 and 34 of IPC against her elder sister
Padma Majhi and both the aforesaid FIRs
were dropped for want of evidence. This
apart, two FIRs were lodged against the
petitioners by their sister Padma Majhi
i.e. FIR No.76 of 2016 dated 15.12.2016 and
FIR No.10 of 2016 dated 16.01.2017 in both
of which chargesheets have been filed and
the trials are in progress.
12. In addition to the above, the State further
submits that the petitioners even made a
complaint to the Chief Minister, whereupon
the Crime Branch conducted an inquiry and
submitted report on 10.07.2019. It reported
that the main reason for the dispute raised
by the petitioners is due to their social
boycott on account of inter-caste marriage
of their sister and on account of cremation
of the father by the elder sister; the
father of the petitioners died a natural
death in hospital; the petitioners locked
his dead body in the house to create media
sensation; and the petitioners were never
assaulted and beaten. The petitioners were
provided proper shelter but they left the
same after three days. They were also
provided immediate assistance of
Rs.10,000/- from the Red Cross fund and
food under the schemes of the Government.
They received 100 kgs of rice and cash of
Rs.2,000/- instantly and now also receiving
or are entitled to receive 10 kgs of rice
per month.
13. It appears that it was in the light of the
aforesaid facts and circumstances and
considering the pathetic condition of the
petitioners, the High Court of Orissa
directed for the closure of the PIL with
the necessary directions which were never
availed by the petitioners.
14. This Court directed the District
Magistrate, Central Delhi, within whose
jurisdiction the petitioners were staying,
to look into the matter and to arrange for
suitable accommodation for their temporary
stay and to ensure that they are provided
with adequate meals. The Court noticing the
mental conditions of the petitioners, also
directed the District Magistrate to ensure
that they receive medical treatment at the
appropriate hospital and may also be
provided with psychological treatment.
15. The District Magistrate, Central Delhi, has
submitted a report which states that
suitable accommodation was arranged for the
petitioners in Delhi but they refused and
insisted that they should be given a
private room with attached facilities. The
petitioners refuse to appear before the
doctors despite District Magistrate
arranging several appointments to ensure
their medical checkup and further
treatment.
16. In view of that has been said above, it is
crystal clear that the petitioners
themselves are not aware as to what they
actually want. If their complaint is not
being registered as an FIR, they have the
remedy to approach the concerned Magistrate
in exercise of powers under Section 156 (3)
of CrPC, 1973 equivalent to Section 175 (3)
of BNSS, 2023.
17. Since there is no FIR as on date at the
behest of the petitioners, there is no
question of any police action or
investigation. If there are no FIR and
investigation, there is no occasion for
considering transferring if the
investigation to the CBI.
18. It also appears that the petitioners are
not satisfied with any kind of facility or
help that is extended to them. They refuse
to accept anything which is offered to them
in their interest.
19. Thus, in the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, we do not
consider it to be a fit case for exercise
of our discretionary jurisdiction under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India,
more particularly, when the High Court of
Orissa while disposing of the PIL before
it, had accorded sufficient liberty to the
petitioners which they have never availed.
20. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed
leaving open the other remedies, if any,
available to the petitioners including that
permitted by the High Court.
21. Pending application(s), if any, stands
disposed of.
……………………………………………………J.
[PANKAJ MITHAL]
……………………………………………………J.
[S.V.N. BHATTI]
NEW DELHI;
May 20, 2026.
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.9 SECTION X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
WRIT PETITION(S)(CRIMINAL) NO(S). 150/2025
PARBATI MAJHI & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ODISHA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 296720/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 295274/2024 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
IA No. 75670/2025 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 20-05-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTIAmicus Curiae Ms. Suja Joshi, Adv.
For Petitioner(s) Petitioner-in-person
For Respondent(s) Mr. Anjuman Tripathy, AOR
Mr. Mohit Singh Sikarwar, Adv.
Mr. Somkeerti V Singhdeo, Adv.UPON hearing the counsel the court made the following
O R D E R
1. The writ petition is dismissed in terms of the
signed order.
2. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(Nidhi Mathur) (Geeta Ahuja) Court Master (NSH) Deputy Registrar
(signed order is placed on file)
