Cuttack: Concerned over what it described as a recurring pattern of local police failing to comply with judicial directions, the Orissa high court has asked the director general of police (DGP) to ensure that officers in-charge of police stations promptly act on orders issued by magistrates and other judicial officers.Calling the issue a ‘matter of serious concern’, Justice Savitri Ratho observed that failure to respond to judicial directions results in repeated adjournments before subordinate courts and compels litigants to approach the high court seeking implementation of orders.Justice Ratho directed the DGP, Y B Khurania, to instruct superintendents of police, commissioners and inspectors in-charge across the state to respond to and comply with judicial orders promptly, so that aggrieved litigants are not forced to flood the high court with petitions alleging police inaction.The direction came on June 12 while disposing of a petition filed by a 65-year-old woman, a resident of Nayagarh district, who alleged that she had been cheated of Rs 2.10 lakh by some people who had promised to sell her land through a registered sale deed. They, however, neither executed the document nor returned the money.After being approached by the woman, the court of judicial magistrate first class, Ranpur, on Aug 6, last year directed the local police to register an FIR and investigate the matter. However, despite repeated reminders from the trial court, no action followed for more than eight months, forcing her to move the high court.During the hearing, the state informed the high court that a case was eventually registered at Ranpur police station this year on April 24 and the investigation was in progress. Though the registration of the FIR had largely resolved the grievance, Justice Ratho examined why the magistrate’s order remained unimplemented for such a long period.In an affidavit, the inspector in-charge of Ranpur police station stated that the court order received on Aug 6, 2025, had been misplaced in the police station. The officer tendered an unconditional apology and assured the court that such lapses would not recur.The explanation reflected a wider problem, Justice Ratho, however, observed, adding, “It is possible for files and orders to be misplaced, but unfortunately, this is not a stray case.”Justice Ratho noted that the high court frequently encounters petitions alleging non-compliance with orders passed by magistrates and family courts. Referring to the explanations often furnished by police officers, the judge said, “The stock excuse of the IICs in such cases is that the file/order got misplaced and in a few cases that the incumbent joined recently.”Rejecting such reasons and observing that police stations maintain separate registers for court communications and official correspondence, Justice Ratho said, “Such excuses are not acceptable.”
