The Orissa High Court criticised the Bhubaneswar DSP for scurrilous remarks against the Advocate General, holding that such conduct defies court orders. It said justice must rest on public trust, emphasising that “purity is the hallmark of justice.”
The Orissa High Court criticized the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Intelligence stationed in Bhubaneswar for making “scurrilous remarks” regarding the Advocate General of Orissa (AG).
Last month, the DSP filed an affidavit before the Court opposing the AG’s involvement in a case, alleging a potential conflict of interest.
Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy expressed concern that the affidavit which contained serious allegations and personal attacks was publicized, prompting multiple media outlets to seek the AG’s response.
Subsequently, the State requested the withdrawal of the affidavit, and the DSP also submitted a similar request, offering an unconditional apology.
The Court permitted the withdrawal and removed the affidavit from the case records, but it condemned the DSP for making unfounded accusations against the AG.
The Court emphasized that such disparaging comments towards constitutional officials should not be tolerated.
It stated,
“The trust of the people upon this institution should not be (belied) by encouraging wild litigants to make scurrilous remarks against constitutional functionaries in defiance of the Courts’ orders. Purity is the hallmark of justice and justice is deeply rooted in the confidence of the people.”
The Court also highlighted that despite its earlier request for the AG’s presence, he decided to recuse himself from the case, making the DSP’s criticism unnecessary.
The Court remarked,
“Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for O.P. No.27 (DSP) should have guided her client properly, instead of creating all these mud slagging.”
Furthermore, it barred the media from publishing the contents of the DSP’s prior affidavit, stating that this decision was made to uphold the integrity of judicial proceedings and prevent frivolous filings.
Last month, the Court had invited the Advocate General to assist in a complex writ petition. However, the DSP the opposing party in the case objected to the AG’s participation, claiming a conflict of interest due to the AG’s previous representation of private parties involved.
After the DSP submitted his affidavit, the AG opted to recuse himself and did not participate in the hearing on January 29. Following this, the State moved to withdraw the controversial affidavit.
READ ALSO: “Prima facie, this is illegal”: Supreme Court Slams UP Police
Additionally, On February 3, the Court allowed the withdrawal but expressed its displeasure towards the DSP for both submitting and publicizing the affidavit.
The Court remarked,
“The Court deprecates the action of Opp. Party No.27 [DSP] in filing such an objection affidavit on 21.01.2026, and making it public and thereby causing unnecessary harassment to learned Advocate General… This Court also is inclined to issue a word of caution to Opp. Party No.27, from committing such mistakes in future,”
The Court highlighted that there was no basis for the DSP to submit such an affidavit, especially since the AG had refrained from arguing the merits of the case on January 15.
Senior Advocate B. Routray represented the petitioners, while Additional Government Advocate Saswat Das appeared for the State, and Senior Advocate P. Rath, along with advocate S. Prust, represented the DSP.
Case Title: Sasmita Sahoo and Others vs State of Odisha and Others