Orissa High Court
ABLAPL/8425/2026 of ABDUL NOUSAT KHAN Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 31 August 2026
of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.8425 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010521412026 1. Abdul Nousat Khan 2. Biswajit Behera …. Petitioners Mr. A . Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC Mr. B.S. Rayaguru, Advocate (Informant) CORAM:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.8425 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010521412026
1. Abdul Nousat Khan
2. Biswajit Behera
….
Petitioners
Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha
….
Opposite Party
Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC
Mr. B.S. Rayaguru, Advocate
(Informant)
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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
31.08.2026
02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State as well as the Informant.
2. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.T.(Special) Case No.44 of 2026 pending on the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judgecum-Judge Special Court, Kamakhyanagar, Dhenkanal, arising out of Tumusingha P.S. Case No.234 of for commission of offences punishable under Section 109(1)/ 115(2)/ 126(2)/ 296/ 3(5)/ 303(2)/ 351(2) of BNS read with Section 3(1)(r)/ 3(1)(s)/ 3(2)(v)/ 3(2)(va) of SC and ST (POA) Act.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that taking into account the omnibus nature of allegations prima facie the offence under the Special Act is not made out. Hence, the objection regarding maintainability, as raised by the learned counsel for the parties, has to be disregarded.
4. So far as the ground of maintainability is concerned, this Court finds force in the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioners, in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Om Prakash Chhawnika alias Om Prakash Chabnika alias Om Prakash Chawnika v. State of Jharkhand and Another 2026 SCC Online SC
676.
5. This Court perused the injury report of the injued-Tapas Malik, indicating that he has suffered four grievous injuries. Out of the six injuries, four are grievous and so far as the injuries to the left knee and right knee are concerned, the opinion has been reserved.
This Court also perused the statement of Tapas Malik, indicating that injuries attributed to him were caused by the Petitioner No.1. At this stage it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that taking into account the nature of allegations, the Petitioner No.2 may be enlarged on pre-arrest bail.
6. Learned counsel for the State as well as the Informant submits that considering the manner in which the offence has been committed, there is no scope to segregate the offences qua the accused.
7. Considering rival submission, this Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre- arrest bail. However, in the event the Petitioners surrender before the learned Court in seisin and move an application for their release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit.
8. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. U.C.C. as per rules.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Soumya Digitally Signed Signed by: SOUMYA RANJAN SAMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 01-Sep-2026 18:28:33 Signature Not Verified