Orissa High Court
Sunil @ Sarat @ Sabyasachi vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party on 17 November, 2025
Author: G. Satapathy
Bench: G. Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.3884 of 2025
Sunil @ Sarat @ Sabyasachi ... Petitioner
Panda
Mr. M.M. Patnaik, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha ... Opposite Party
Mr. P. Satpathy, Addl. PP
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER(ORAL)
17.11.2025 Order No.
05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. This is a 2nd successive bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Nuagaon P.S. Case No.09 of 2008 corresponding to S.T. Case No.115 of 2015 (G.R. Case No.91 of 2008) pending in the file of learned Sessions Judge, Nayagarh, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.121/ 121-A/ 122/ 148/ 342/ 353/ 450/ 427/ 302/436/396/120-B/149 of the IPC read with Sec.25(l-A)/27 of the Arms Act, U/S.4 of the Prevention of Destruction of the Public Property Act, U/S.3 of the Explosive Substances Act, U/S.7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and U/S.16/20/38 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, on the main allegation of creating vandalism in the Mahipur Police Outpost, along with co-accused other naxals by entering into conspiracy and burning the Outpost to Page 1 of 3 ashes as well as killing one Gramaraskhi- Ananda Chandra Nayak and one Home Guard-Chintamani Sahoo by firing at them from firearms.
3. Heard, Mr. Mruganka Mauli Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record.
4. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears serious allegation against the petitioner and the other Maoist for executing the crime by forming an unlawful assembly in pursuance to a conspiracy and in such incident, two innocent Police personnel died and the Police Outpost was burnt. It is undoubtedly advanced for the petitioner to grant him bail on the ground of delay in disposal of the case, but the allegation against the petitioner is not only serious, but also grave. On being asked, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also candidly clarified that 99 out of 132 cases registered against the petitioner, have ended in acquittal, but in 12 cases, the petitioner has been granted bail by this Court and 04 cases have been stayed by the order of the Apex Court. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner admits the conviction of the petitioner and his sentence to undergo life imprisonment in one case.
5. In such view of the matter and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence as Page 2 of 3 alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him coupled with facts narrated above and regard being had to the report of the learned trial Court to complete the trial within six months hence and trial having at its fag end with examination of 22 out of 38 charge sheeted witnesses and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the bail application stands disposed of.
(G. Satapathy) Judge S.Sasmal Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Page 3 of 3 Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 18-Nov-2025 10:57:41