Orissa High Court
CRLMA/144/2025 of SANJAY KESHARI MOHAPATRA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 1 September 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMA No.144 of 2025 CNR No. ODHC010723992025 Sanjay Keshari Mohapatra …. Petitioner Mr.Niranjan Panda, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha 2. Mohan Giri 3. Kunilata Rout …. Opposite Parties Mr.S.Panigrahi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMA No.144 of 2025
CNR No. ODHC010723992025
Sanjay Keshari Mohapatra
….
Petitioner
Mr.Niranjan Panda, Advocate
-versus-
1. State of Odisha
2. Mohan Giri
3. Kunilata Rout
…. Opposite Parties
Mr.S.Panigrahi, ASC
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
01.09.2026
08.
1. Heard Mr.Panda, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.Panigrahi, learned ASC.
2. This CRLMA has been filed seeking cancellation of bail granted to the Opposite Party Nos.2 & 3 by order dated 06.08.2025 passed in ABLAPL No.8919 of 2025.
3. Admittedly, Opposite Party Nos.2 & 3 were granted pre-arrest bail by this Court by order dated 06.08.2025 passed in ABLAPL No.8919 of 2025. For convenience of the reference, the said order is extracted hereunder: “1.Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
2. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.290 of 2025 pending on the file of learned S.D.J.M., Nimapara, arising out of Nimapara P.S. Case No.82 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/ 296/ 324(4)/ 115(2)/ 118(1)/ 117(2)/ 303(2)/ 351(2)/ 3(5) of BNS.
3. At the outset, it is seen that Petitioner No.3 (Prakash Giri @ Papi Giri) is taken into custody in the meanwhile.
4. Hence, the ABLAPL in respect of Petitioner No.3 (Prakash Giri @ Papi Giri) stands disposed of as infructuous.
5. So far as ABLAPL in respect of Petitioner No.1, 2 and 4 is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioners have been implicated in a routine manner because they all belong to one family. Hence, they may be protected by pre-arrest bail, since the Petitioner No.1 is a lady and Petitioner No.4 is aged about 66 years and there is no specific overt act so far as Petitioner No.2 is concerned.
6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer, inter alia, on the ground that the injured has suffered grievous injury and the co-accused has been forwarded.
7. So far as ABLAPL in respect of Petitioner Nos.1 and 4 is concerned, considering the nature of allegation, it is directed that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioner Nos.1 and 4 shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper.
8. It is needless to state that the Petitioner Nos.1 and 4 shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
9. So far as ABLAPL in respect of Petitioner No.2 is concerned, this Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre-arrest bail. However, it is directed that Petitioner No.2 may surrender before the learned S.D.J.M., Nimapara in connection with the aforementioned case within one month from today.
In the event of his surrender and motion for bail, the same be considered by the learned S.D.J.M., Nimapara on merits, in the first hour of the day.
In the event of rejection of the prayer for bail by the learned S.D.J.M., Nimapara, the Petitioner No.2 is at liberty to move the higher forum for bail in the second hour on the same day.
10. On being so moved, the higher forum is requested to make an endeavor to dispose of the bail application of the Petitioner No.2 on the same day.
The case diary shall be made available to the concerned courts to facilitate disposal of the bail application of the Petitioner No.2 and learned S.D.J.M., Nimapara is called upon to transmit the case record to the higher forum at the earliest in the event of rejection of such bail application.
Ground of parity, if any, may be considered by the learned court(s) below.
11. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. Xxx xxx xxx”
4. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara, passed order on 25.08.2025 releasing the Opposite Party Nos.2 & 3 on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant Sri Panda submits that though in the case at hand the charge- sheet has been filed on 31.07.2025 under section 126(2)/296/115(2)/117(2)/324(4)/109/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023, the same was not brought to the notice of this Court on 06.08.2025.
And submitting that since one of the offences is under section 109 of the BNS, though the learned Magistrate lacked inherent jurisdiction, granted bail.
6. It is apt to note that the learned Magistrate has acted in terms of the order passed. Hence, the prayer of the Petitioner for cancellation of bail of said Opposite Party Nos.2 & 3, in the considered view of this Court, does not merit acceptance.
7. Accordingly, the CRLMA is disposed of.
(V. Narasingh)
Judge Basu Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV NAYAK Designation: ADDL. DY. REGISTRAR-CUM-ADDL. PRINCIPAL SECY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 02-Sep-2026 18:29:50 Signature Not Verified