In early January 2026, a Muslim man in Mayurbhanj district, Odisha, was allegedly assaulted by a group of individuals who removed his clothes, tied his legs with rope, dragged him naked on a public road, and forced him to chant 'Jai Shri Ram'. A video of the incident was recorded and subsequently went viral on social media. The police registered a first information report (FIR) on 3 January 2026, and two accused persons were arrested. The case remains under investigation.
According to Live Law, the Orissa High Court ordered that the investigation be supervised by a police officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) or Sub-Divisional Police Officer (SDPO). Justice Savitri Ratho issued this directive after considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the incident was videographed and widely circulated online.
The FIR was registered under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including 126(2) (wrongful restraint), 296 (obscene acts), 117(2) (voluntarily causing grievous hurt), 133 (assault or use of criminal force), 351(3) (criminal intimidation), and 3(5) (criminal acts done by several persons with common intention) as detailed in coverage. The petitioner, the victim’s father, sought transfer of the investigation to the Crime Branch or a Special Investigation Team (SIT), citing the seriousness of the incident and the need for impartiality.
The police authorities, represented in court, submitted that the injuries sustained by the victim were simple in nature and confirmed that two accused had been arrested, while others remained at large following reports. The petitioner argued that additional sections, including those related to organised crime and deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, should have been added to the FIR.
"The investigation in the case is in progress, but 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," the order stated.
The High Court directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to assign a senior officer to supervise the investigation and ensure that it is conducted fairly and in accordance with law as details emerged. The court also instructed that, upon completion, the final report must be submitted as per legal requirements.
In the proceedings, the State opposed the petitioner’s request for transfer of the investigation, arguing that the petitioner was neither the victim nor the original informant. However, the court decided to grant the request for DSP-level supervision due to the gravity of the allegations and the supporting video evidence according to analysis.
"In view of the background of the case, the opposite party no.3 is directed to assign a Senior Officer not below the rank of the post of DSP / SDPO to supervise the investigation of the case who shall ensure that investigation is conducted in a fair manner and after completion of investigation, final form is submitted in accordance with law," the court ordered.
The petitioner was represented by advocate PR Chhatoi, while the State and police authorities were represented by advocate Sarathi Jyoti Mohanty in further statements. The court’s order emphasised the importance of impartial and thorough investigation, particularly in cases involving allegations of communal violence and public humiliation.
Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.