Orissa High Court
ABLAPL/10063/2026 of SURENDRA PARIDA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 2 September 2026
of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.10063 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010647672026 1. Surendra Parida 2. Santosh Nayak @ Santosh Kumar Nayak 3. Ganga Biswal @ Gangadhar Biswal 4. Raghu Pradhan 5. Kunja Khatei 6. Bhaba Pradhan@ Bhabanath Pradhan 7. Bhima Behera 8. Mahara Behera 9. Dina
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.10063 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010647672026
1. Surendra Parida
2. Santosh Nayak @
Santosh Kumar
Nayak
3. Ganga Biswal @
Gangadhar Biswal
4. Raghu Pradhan
5. Kunja Khatei
6. Bhaba Pradhan@
Bhabanath Pradhan
7. Bhima Behera
8. Mahara Behera
9. Dina Sahu@
Dinabandhu Sahu
10. Dhadu Sahoo
11. Bhikari Biswal
12. Bhagu Biswal
13. Bishnu Behera
14. Sudam Nayak
15. Siba Biswal@ Siba
Prasad Biswal
16. Ghadei Nayak@
Gadadhar Nayak
17. Braja Jena@ Braja
Kishore Jena
18. Damodar Jena
19. Jayee Behera@
Jayakrushna Behera
20. Sukanta Behera
21. Laxmidhar Jena
22. Raju Behera@
Rajkishore Behera
23. Sarat Behera @
Sarata Behera
….
Petitioners
Mr. T.P. Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha
….
Opposite Party
Mr. S.K. Lenka, ASC
Mr. L.N. Rayatsingh, Adv. (Informant)
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
02.09.2026
01. 1. Learned counsel Mr. Rayatsingh submits that he has entered appearance on behalf of the Informant by filing Vakalatanama.
2. Registry is requested to verify and tag the same with file. Name of learned counsel Mr. Rayatsingh be reflected in the file, cause list as well as web portal of this Court.
3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.
4. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.554 of 2026 pending on the file of learned Nyayadhikari Gramanyayalaya, Puri, arising out of Puri Sadar P.S. Case No.408 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under section 115(2)/ 126(2)/ 296/ 3(5)/ 303(2)/ 324(4)/ 351(2) of BNS.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that taking into account the omnibus nature of allegation, the Petitioners may be protected by pre- arrest bail.
6. It is further submitted that from the tenor of the allegation, it can be seen that the same has been done to feed fat the grudge of the informant regarding recruitment of his wife as an Anganwadi worker.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State as well as informant opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail.
8. Learned counsel for the Informant submits that because the Informant’s wife was selected as an Anganwadi worker without paying the ransom as demanded by the villagers virtually they have been socially ostracized and their valuable trees have been cut and informant and family are being threatened.
9. Learned counsel for the State, while echoing the statements of the counsel for the informant submits that Petitioner No.1 has one of the criminal antecedents having been cited as an accused in Puri Sadar P.S. Case No.408 of 2026 U/s.126(2)/ 296/ 115(2)/ 303(2)/ 324(4)/ 351(2)/ 3(5) of BNS.
10. Considering the rival submissions, this Court directs that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper.
11. It is needless to state that the Petitioners shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
12. Additionally, it is directed that Petitioner Nos.1- 3, 5&6, 10, 13-15 and 18-23 shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once a week on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin for the next three month. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin as well as Registry of this Court.
13. It is further directed that the Petitioners shall not in any way try to threaten or intimidate the informant and his family.
14. It shall be open for the prosecution as well as the informant to seek variance of this order, if there is any threat perception.
Violation of any of the condition shall entail cancellation.
15. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of.
16. U.C.C. as per rules.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Santoshi Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 03-Sep-2026 20:56:57 Signature Not Verified