Orissa High Court
ABLAPL/3078/2026 of RAJENDRA PRASAD JENA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 19 August 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.3078 of 2026 CNR No.ODHC010174302026 Rajendra Prasad Jena …. Petitioner Mr.B.B.Choudhury, Advocate -versus- 1.State of Odisha 2. Informant …. Opposite Parties Mr.C.R. Swain, AGA Mr.Sushanta Kumar Das, Advocate for Informant CORAM:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.3078 of 2026
CNR No.ODHC010174302026
Rajendra Prasad Jena
….
Petitioner
Mr.B.B.Choudhury, Advocate
-versus-
1.State of Odisha
2. Informant
….
Opposite Parties
Mr.C.R. Swain, AGA
Mr.Sushanta Kumar Das, Advocate for 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
19.08.2026
04. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.
2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.166 of 2026, arising out Info Valley P.S. Case No.60 of 2026 pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C., Jatani for commission of offences punishable under Section 318(4)/126(2)/ 115(2)/117(2)/296/351(3) of BNS, 2023.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the litigation essentially is a follow up on an agreement. Hence, in the first case, the FIR ought not to have been instituted.
4. Per contra, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Informant with vehemence as well as echoed by learned counsel for the State notwithstanding that there was a relationship between the parties, the object to deceive was there from inception. Hence the boggy of a civil claim being given a clolour of criminality ought not to weigh this Court.
5. There is an agreement, which is there on record and it is also borne out from the rival submission that an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- has been returned to the Informant through Bank Transfer.
6. Considering the rival submission, this Court is not persuaded to hold that in the case at hand, the custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is warranted. Accordingly, it is directed that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, Petitioner shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper
7. It is needless to state that the Petitioner shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
8. The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
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 10:34:24 Signature Not Verified