ABLAPL/9441/2026 of RAJA PRADHAN Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 18 August 2026

ORDER

18.08.2026

01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.179 of 2026 pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C., Pipili, arising out of Pipili P.S. Case No.131 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under Section 126(2)/ 115(2)/ 118(1)/ 109(1)/ 117(2)/ 351(3)/ 3(5) of BNS.

3. This is the second journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Petitioner being Petitioner No.6 had moved this Court in ABLAPL No.2983 of 2026 and by order dated 08.05.2026, this Court was not inclined to consider such prayer also taking note of the injury and the state of health of the injured, necessitating recording of the dying declaration. The relevant observations, which weighed with this Court is extracted hereunder; “xxx

xxx

xxx

5. Learned counsel for the informant has brought to the notice of the Court the orders dated 08.04.2026 and 23.04.2026 passed in CRLMP No.415 of 2026 which has been filed by the informant. In order dated 08.04.2026, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed various directions beside observing as under:- “3. Further, in the injury requisition, it has been mentioned that Lipina Swain assaulted Sukanti Biswal with the paniki to kill her, due to which she sustained injuries on her head and the injury report reveals that incise injury 5x2x1 cm is present on her scalp, which is grievous in nature and caused by iron rod vegetable cutter. There is also an incised injury over her right eyebrow and the requisition dated 05.03.2026 submitted to the Director, SUM Hospital for recording dying declaration of injured Sukanti Biswal could not be done as the patient is on invasive Mechanical ventilator support.”

xxx

xxx

xxx”

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that charge sheet in the meanwhile has been filed and one of the co-accused on surrendering has been released on bail. Hence, the Petitioner may be protected by pre-arrest bail.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail.

6. Considering the nature of allegation and the seriousness of the injury as noted herein above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre-arrest bail. However, it is directed that Petitioner may surrender before the learned J.M.F.C., Pipili 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 J.M.F.C., Pipili on merits, in the first hour of the day.

In the event of rejection of the prayer for bail by the learned J.M.F.C., Pipili, the Petitioner is at liberty to move the higher forum for bail in the second hour on the same day.

7. On being so moved, the higher forum is requested to make an endeavor to dispose of the bail application of the Petitioner 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 and learned J.M.F.C., Pipili 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.

8. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of.

9. U.C.C. as per rules.

(V. NARASINGH)

Judge

Ayesha

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 19-Aug-2026 19:08:10 Signature Not Verified