Orissa High Court
Gangadhar Nag vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party on 11 March, 2026
Author: G. Satapathy
Bench: G. Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.727 of 2026
(In the matter of application under Section 483 of the
BNSS).
Gangadhar Nag ... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha ... Opposite Party
For Petitioner : Mr. S. Panigrahi, Advocate
For Opposite Party : Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
DATE OF HEARING & DATE OF JUDGMENT:11.03.2026 (ORAL)
G. Satapathy, J.
1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Bhawanipatna Sadar PS Case No.530 of 2025 corresponding to CT Case No.1135 of 2025 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.147/ 148/ 149/ 150 of BNS r/w Sec.17 & 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act & Sec.17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sec.4 & 5 of Explosive Substances Act.
BLAPL No.727 of 2026 Page 1 of 8
2. The petitioner seeks for bail for want of compliance of Sec.47 of BNSS/ Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India.
3. In the Course of hearing, Mr. Sisira Panigrahi, learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing attention of the Court to law laid down by Apex Court in Mihir Rajesh Shah Vrs. State of Maharashtra; (2026) 1 SCC 500 submits that the accused was not communicated in writing the grounds of his arrest and thereby, the petitioner is entitled to bail for infraction of compliance of provisions of Sec.47 of BNSS/ Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. 3.1. On the other hand, Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. PP by taking this Court through the documents as produced for the petitioner submits that the said provision has been duly complied with as the petitioner was duly communicated in Odia and that too, in writing about the grounds of his arrest since the document by which the petitioner claims for infraction of the provision reveals the aforesaid communication to the accused with his signature and signature of his wife and also countersigned by the arresting officer and thereby, there is hardly any infraction BLAPL No. 727 of 2026 Page 2 of 8 of the provision of Sec.47 of BNSS/ Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, so as to render the arrest and remand of the petitioner to custody illegal necessitating his release on bail.
4. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, the petitioner has definitely set up the plea of grant of bail for want of compliance of Sec.47 of BNSS r/w Sec.22(1) of the Constitution of India and it is no more res-integra that the accused has got a valuable statutory and mandatory right to be informed/ communicated in writing about the grounds of his arrest in the language he understands immediately after his arrest and if that is not possible immediate after arrest, he shall be informed accordingly just two hours before his production in the Court. In this case, the petitioner has of course produced the arrest memo under Annexure-1 series and what has been written exactly at column no.10 therein is extracted as under:-
"Reasons/Grounds of arrest: The accused Gangadhar Nag (34) S/o Late Rasik Nag, of village Sulia, GP- Gundri, PS- Sadar, Bhawanipatna, Dist. Kalahandi transporting the explosive materials i.e. Detonators- 3 pieces in folding condition, Gelatine -ideal power-90- 4 BLAPL No. 727 of 2026 Page 3 of 8 pieces. Electric wire, Nippo Battery-10 pieces small size (AA-3 DG), solar panel- 1 piece, Mao Poster Written in Odia typing Slogan against police- 24 sheets, one black polythene, odia anti- slogan hand writing poster (Bharatiya CPI, Maobadi), Mao banner, leaflet in a jari bag without any licence or authority for delivery of the same to the Maoist to facilitates, conspired the Maoist in wagging of war against the Govt."
5. Additionally, the document in Odia that is produced in this bail application under Annexure-1 series by the learned counsel for the petitioner discloses that the petitioner has also been communicated in writing in Odia about his grounds of arrest and such communication as made therein to the petitioner is extracted in English as under:
Grounds of Arrest Recipient:-Gangadhar Nag(34) S/o Late Rasik Nag, of village Sulia, GP- Gundri, PS- Sadar, Bhawanipatna, Dist. Kalahandi:-
"You are hereby informed that there is sufficient evidence against you in Bhabanipatna Sadar PS Case No.530 of 2025 dated 07.11.2025 U/S.147/148/149/150 of BNS r/w Sec.17/18 of UAP Act,1967/17 Cr.LA Act/ Sec.4 & 5 of Explosive Substance Act and you are accordingly arrested on 07.11.2025 at 10.30PM in connection with this case and your wife was also informed.
Read over the aforesaid communication to the accused and on finding the same to be correct, BLAPL No. 727 of 2026 Page 4 of 8 the accused Gangadhar Nayak put his LTI on it."
6. It is, therefore, very clear that the copy of the aforesaid written communication of grounds of arrest in Odia was handed over to the accused as acknowledged by him in the form of putting his LTI on such document in Odia which is evident from the word recipient (Praptesu in Odia). It is also found from the above document that the contents of the document was read over and explained to the petitioner in Odia and who after finding the same to be correct has put his LTI. The aforesaid information was also acknowledged by the wife of the petitioner namely Laxmi Nag and another two persons, namely Niranjan Bibhar & Sankar Suna by putting their LTIs & signature(Sankar Suna) on it and the aforesaid communication was also countersigned by the IO in Odia.
7. Sec.47 of BNSS makes it imperative for an arresting officer while arresting any person without warrant to communicate to the arrestee forthwith the full particulars for the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest. Further, in Paragraph-62 of Mihir Rajesh Shah (supra), the Apex court has held as under:- BLAPL No. 727 of 2026 Page 5 of 8
"62. xx xxx xx in cases where the police are already in possession of documentary material furnishing a cogent basis for the arrest, the written grounds of arrest must be furnished to the arrestee on his arrest. However, in exceptional circumstances such as offences against body or property committed in flagrante delicto, while informing the grounds of arrest in writing on arrest each is rendered in practical, it shall be sufficient for the police officer or other person making the arrest to orally convey the same to the person at the time of arrest. Later, a written copy of grounds of arrest must be supplied to the arrested person within a reasonable time and in no event later than two hours prior to production of the arrestee before the Magistrate for remand proceeding. The remand papers shall contain the grounds of arrest and in case there is delay in supply thereof, a note indicating a cause for it be included for the information of the Magistrate."
8. In the aforesaid backdrop and situation, when the petitioner was duly informed/communicated about his grounds of arrest in writing in Odia, which was duly acknowledged by the petitioner as recipient by putting his LTI and countersigned by the arresting officer and keeping in view the remand of the petitioner to judicial custody on his production by the Court, which itself is indicative of mandatory compliance of arrest and remand, this Court hardly finds any infraction of compliance of provision of Sec.47 of BNSS and Article 22(1) of the Constitution of BLAPL No. 727 of 2026 Page 6 of 8 India so as to render the arrest and remand of the petitioner illegal necessitating grant of bail to him. The plea as advanced by the petitioner for grant of bail for noncompliance of Sec.47 of BNSS and Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India is found to be unmerited and is accordingly rejected.
9. Even otherwise on merit for consideration of bail application of the petitioner, it is found that the petitioner was forwarded to the Court for the aforesaid offences including the offences Sec.17/18 UAP Act, but grant or refusal of bail for commission of offence under UAP Act is further regulated by Sec.43(D)(5) of UAP Act, which provides that no person accused of offence shall be released on bail, where Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application of such accused person, but if the Court, on perusal of the case diary or report made U/S. 173 of the CrPC/193 of BNSS is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such person is prima facie true, it can certainly grant bail to the accused. Thus, bail is not the absolute rule BLAPL No. 727 of 2026 Page 7 of 8 in a case for commission of offences under Chapter IV & VI of the UAP Act, 1967.
10. On a studied scrutiny materials placed on record together with the allegation as levelled against the petitioner, this Court hardly finds the petitioner to have satisfied the conditions of Sec.43(D)(5) of UAP Act, which is sine qua non for grant of bail. Although, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed, but he fails to file the copy of the charge-sheet, but the impugned order does not reveal about completion of investigation in this case. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into consideration the materials placed on record, this Court hardly finds any reason to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
11. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of the order be immediately communicated to the learned trial Court.
(G. Satapathy) Signature Not Verified Judge Digitally Signed Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack Date: 12-Mar-2026 19:20:44 Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the11th day of March, 2026/Jayakrushna BLAPL No. 727 of 2026 Page 8 of 8