ABLAPL/7320/2026 of SUJIT KUMAR DAS Vs STATE OF ORISSA on 20 August 2026

ORDER

20.08.2026

04. 1. Heard learned Senor Counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State as well as the Informant.

2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.299 of 2026 pending on the file of learned Grama Nyayadhikari-cum- J.M.F.C., Odagaon, arising out of Sarankul P.S. Case No.133 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 64(1)1/742/351(3)3 of BNS, 2023.

1 64. Punishment for rape.—(1) Whoever, except in the cases provided for in sub-section (2), commits rape, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine. 2 74. Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty.—Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either

3. Investigation of the case has been taken over by the Crime Branch of Odisha Police, pursuant to which CAW & CW P.S. Case No.03 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 742/ 64(2)(a)(i)4/ 75(2)5/ 304(2)6/ 238(c)7/ 351(2)8/ 2419 of BNS, 2023 has been registered.

description for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine. 3 351. Criminal intimidation.— (3) Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation by threatening to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. 4 64. Punishment for rape.— (2) Whoever,—

(a) being a police officer, commits rape,—

(i) within the limits of the police station to which such police officer is appointed; or

(ii) in the premises of any station house; or

(iii) on a woman in such police officer's custody or in the custody of a police officer subordinate to such police officer; or 5 75. Sexual harassment.— (2) Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iii) of sub-section (1) shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. 6 304. Snatching.— (2) Whoever commits snatching, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine. 7 238. Causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender.—Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the Commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any information respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false shall,— (c) if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for any term not extending to ten years, be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for the offence, or with fine, or with both. 8 351. Criminal intimidation.— (2) Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. 9 241. Destruction of document or electronic record to prevent its production as evidence.—Whoever secretes or destroys any document or electronic record which he may be lawfully compelled to produce as evidence in a Court or in any proceeding lawfully held before a public

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that initially the informant approached the Petitioner seeking his help as a police officer but during course of time, the relationship developed which was consensual. But the same is being given a colour of criminality and the Petitioner being accused of commission of offences as alleged in the FIR.

5. It is his further submission that because of professional rivalry to feed fat their grudge against the Petitioner, materials have been tailored in such a fashion so as to paint the Petitioner as the perpetrator of the offences. Hence, it is submitted with vehemence that the allegations have to be viewed keeping in view the above backdrop of facts.

6. Such submission is opposed by the learned counsel for the State as well as Informant.

7. This Court perused the CDRs, which prima facie establishes that the Petitioner was in constant touch with the Informant. The statements of CSW No.24-Tarakanta Patnaik, who is a colleague of the servant, as such, or obliterates or renders illegible the whole or any part of such document or electronic record with the intention of preventing the same from being produced or used as evidence before such Court or public servant as aforesaid, or after he shall have been lawfully summoned or required to produce the same for that purpose, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.

Petitioner as well as that of CSW No.15-Md. Kudrat Alli, lend credence to the allegations made. This Court also perused the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 BNSSS.

8. Considering the nature of allegations particularly under section 64(2)(a)4, this Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer for exceptional remedy of pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner.

9. However, it shall be open for the Petitioner to surrender and move for bail before the Court in seisin, which shall be considered on its own merit.

10. It is needless to state here that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of considering the pre-arrest bail application of the Petitioner. Such observations ought not to weigh with the Court below while considering the bail application of the Petitioner, if so moved.

11. The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of. The interim order dated 27.07.2026 stands vacated.

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

(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: 21-Aug-2026 19:25:12 Signature Not Verified