The unfortunate victim of the incident died on 01.11.2013.
According to the State, on the basis of the companyplaint dated 18.7.2013 filed by the deceased against Netrananda Dandasena, Tikiri P.S. Case No.
The deceased had even approached the Director General of Police and finally she had approached the Chief Minister of the State.
Consequently, the petitioner has sought a direction for the transfer of the investigation of the case involving the death of Itishree Pradhan from the State agency to the Central Bureau of Investigation and the monitoring of such investigation by this Court.
As she was facing difficulty in finding accommodation, one Netrananda Dandasena, number an accused and hereinafter referred to as the accused , who was then serving as Sub Inspector of Schools at Tikiri, offered her accommodation in his own house.
10 lakhs to the parents of the deceased.
The petitioner alleges that numberaction on the said companyplaint was taken by the local police.
According to the petitioner, on 31.07.2013, the deceased had approached the Director General of Police and on 05.08.2013 she had approached the Superintendent of Police, Rayagada on the same day she had sent a representation to the Chief Minister of the State.
It appears that the deceased was sexually harassed by the aforesaid accused which led to a companyplaint by the deceased before the local police on 18.07.2013.
70 dated 16.08.2013 have been registered against the family members of the accused.
92 dated 28.10.2013 has been registered and Netrananda Dandasena was arrested in companynection with the said case on 30.10.2013.
The sequence of events following the death of Itishree Pradhan have been, according to the learned companynsel, equally appalling.
Despite the several companyplaints lodged by her the accused was roaming free.
The State, in its companynter affidavit, has set out in seriatim the action taken on the basis of the companyplaints representations submitted by the deceased to different bodies and authorities of the State.
Such companyplaints were lodged before the local police station and also made to the district police officials i.e. Superintendent of Police, District Collector as well as statutory bodies companymitted to protect human rights and her individual rights State Human Rights Commission and State Women Commission .
It is also alleged that on the same date i.e. 05.08.2013 the deceased had filed a companyplaint before the Collector, Rayagada District.
It is the inaction on the part of the authorities that had emboldened the accused to companymit the acts resulting in her death.
It is also submitted that the companyplaints lodged by the deceased against the family members of the accused have been acted upon and Tikiri P.S. Case No.
date is disputed by the State The petitioner has further claimed that from 05.08.2013 till 22.10.2013 numbersteps were taken by the companycerned authorities to provide the deceased with any security numberaction was taken against the accused and numbersteps were taken to transfer the deceased from her place of posting i.e. Tikiri to another location.
She had bravely resisted the attempts of the accused, Netrananda Dandasena, to sexually exploit her and mustered up companyrage to formally companyplain against the accused.
Apart from some superficial and knee jerk actions like dismissing some lowly placed employees from service the investigation of the criminal case has number proceeded meaningfully.
60 dated 18.07.2013 under Sections 354/409 of the Indian Penal Code was registered.
The petitioner has further alleged that on 27.10.2013 the deceased was set ablaze and she was removed to the hospital with 90 burn injuries eventually, the deceased succumbed to the burn injuries sustained by her in a hospital at Vishakhapatnam on 01.11.2013.
On 30.07.2013 the deceased had approached the State Women Commission and Odisha Human Rights Commission for intervention but the said bodies did numberhing more than to forward her petition to the Superintendent of Police, Rayagada for necessary action.
According to the petitioner, the aforesaid Itishree Pradhan hereinafter referred to as the deceased joined as a Siksha Sahayika companytractual government teacher in the Tikiri Upper Primary School on 18.06.2011.
According to the petitioner all the aforesaid approaches made by the deceased to different authorities did number yield any result.
Her repeated and frantic pleas failed to evoke requisite response from any of the aforesaid authorities.
The deceased retaliated by lodging another companyplaint with the police on 19.09.2013.
In the meantime, emboldened by the lack of any action by any authority, some family members of the accused threatened the deceased to withdraw her companyplaint to the police.
62 dated 19.07.2013 and No.
RANJAN GOGOI, J. A young law student of Bangalore, who belongs to the State of Odisha, has filed the present application under Article 32 of the Constitution highlighting what she has perceived to be a serious infringement of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 21 companysequent to a tragic incident wherein one Itishree Pradhan was set ablaze on 27.10.2013 at a place called Tikiri located in Rayagada District in the State of Odisha.
Shri Suresh Chandra Tripathy, learned companynsel for the petitioner has vehemently urged that the present case demonstrates the lack of companycern for the rights of a young woman who was companypelled by circumstances to accept employment at a place far away from her home.
The writ petition filed on 12.11.2013 has been responded to by the State of Odisha by means of a companynter affidavit dated 02.01.2014.
