SC ISSUES CONTEMPT SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO ODISHA DGP FOR CASUAL APPROACH TO COMPLIANCE:

The Supreme Court has issued a show-cause notice for contempt to the Director General of Police (DGP) of Odisha after finding that he failed to comply with its earlier directions in a motor accident claim dispute. The matter was heard by a bench consisting of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prasanna B. Varale, who were examining an appeal related to identifying a Bolero pickup van allegedly involved in a fatal road accident that occurred in 2017.

On March 6, 2025, the Supreme Court had specifically directed the DGP to constitute and personally supervise a Special Investigation Team (SIT) tasked with verifying whether the vehicle in question was involved in the accident. Despite the clarity of this instruction, the Court learned that the DGP had not undertaken the mandated supervisory role. Instead, he transferred the responsibility to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CID, Crime Branch, Odisha, Cuttack. The Deputy SP, in turn, submitted a report without demonstrating any meaningful effort to scrutinize the progress of the investigation or to obtain further clarification from the insurance company, which was central to establishing the vehicle’s involvement.

Upon reviewing the status of compliance, the bench observed that the DGP had displayed a notably casual approach towards the Court’s specific directions. The judges noted that although the matter had been entrusted directly to him, he chose to delegate the task without ensuring that the investigation was being properly conducted. The Court further recorded that no satisfactory explanation was provided by the State’s counsel regarding why the DGP failed to supervise the formation or functioning of the SIT or to ensure that any gaps in the investigation were addressed.

In view of this conduct, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure and decided to initiate contempt proceedings. The bench directed the DGP to submit a personally affirmed show-cause affidavit before the next hearing date explaining why the Court should not proceed against him for non-compliance. The Court also made it clear that any further delay in the completion of the investigation would be viewed seriously. It emphasized that the affidavit must contain a detailed account of why such a casual approach was adopted despite the explicit instruction that the DGP himself was to oversee the investigation.

The bench added that if the investigation is not completed by the next date of listing, the Court would take a strict view of the matter, making it clear that failure to comply further could invite more serious consequences. The matter has been listed for the next hearing on December 16, 2025. This development highlights the Supreme Court’s continuing insistence on strict adherence to its directions, particularly in motor accident cases where the identification of the offending vehicle directly affects compensation proceedings. The Court’s decision to insist on personal accountability underscores its view that senior officials cannot evade responsibility once the Court entrusts them with supervisory duties.