Orissa High Court
BLAPL/5633/2026 of ROSHAN ORAM Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 1 September 2026
of 2026 Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL NO. 5633 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010367842026 (In the matter of application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023). Roshan Oram … Petitioner -versus- State of Orissa and another … Opposite Parties For Petitioner : Mr. R.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL NO. 5633 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010367842026
(In the matter of application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023).
Roshan Oram
…
Petitioner
-versus-
State of Orissa and another …
Opposite Parties
For Petitioner
: Mr. R. Panda, Advocate
For Opposite Parties
: Mr. T.K. Acharya, Addl. PP
Ms. A. Prusty,
Advocate(Informant)
CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:01.09.2026(ORAL)
G. Satapathy, J.
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.
1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Lephripada PS Case No.70 of 2024 corresponding to Special GR Case No.42 of 2024 pending in the file of learned ADJ-cum- Presiding Officer, Special Court under POCSO Act, Sundargarh for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 376-D/376-A/366/376(2)(n) of the IPC r/w Section 6 of the POCSO Act, on the main allegation of committing Gang Rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the victim.
2. In the course of hearing, Mr. Ramakanta Panda, learned counsel for the Petitioner highlighting the evidence of the victim and her mother together with the evidence of the Doctor submits that there was in fact no forcible sexual intercourse upon the victim and the victim has denied to know the Petitioner in her testimony and thereby, the implication of the Petitioner is highly improbable for the offences and, therefore, the Petitioner having detained in custody for a substantial period, he may kindly be admitted to bail.
2.1. On the other hand, Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Addl. PP by placing the relevant evidence of the victim and the Doctor, prays to reject the bail application of the Petitioner. Similarly, Ms. Anisha Prusty, learned counsel appearing virtually for the Informant being engaged by Legal-Aid submits that the evidence of the victim is very clear and she having identified the Petitioner in her testimony for commission of rape upon her by the Petitioner and others, the bail application of the Petitioner may kindly be rejected.
3. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, not only there appears allegation against the Petitioner for committing Gang Rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the victim, but also the victim has testified against the Petitioner. Besides, the trial is going on and evidence of ten witnesses have already been recorded. The allegation against the Petitioner is not only grave, but also serious. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and on consideration of materials placed on record keeping in view the evidence of the victim and that of the Doctor, who had examined the victim, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner.
4. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned trial Court.
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 1st September, 2026/Priyajit Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 02-Sep-2026 17:29:47 Signature Not Verified