Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Papu @ Papun Kumar Sahu vs State Of Odisha .... Opp. Party on 18 December, 2025

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                         BLAPL No. 13019 of 2025

           Papu @ Papun Kumar Sahu            ....    Petitioners
           @ Sahoo                                 Mr. B.P. Nanda,
                                                   Advocate



                                     -versus-
           State of Odisha                   .... Opp. Party
                                                Mr. S.J. Mohanty,
                                                ASC


         CORAM:
              JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order                               ORDER
 No.                              18.12.2025

01. 1. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Samal Barrage P.S. Case No. 281 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2385 of 2021 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 457/380/34 IPC, pending in the Court of the learned SDJM, Talcher.

The petitioner had approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Talcher in Bail Application No. 626 of 2025 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 28.11.2025 rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any Page 1 of 3 other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R.

3. The prosecution case as per the FIR is that on 19.12.2021 the complainant Binoja Kumar Behera reported in writing that he was engaged some West Bengal manson for his new building construction work. They were brought two nos. of boss company cuter machine along with them. On 17.12.2021 evening at about 7.00 P.M. one Babul Barik, Sudhakar Barik and one unknown person came to the construction site and asking his manson that what things have been kept at which place and then returned back. Thereafter, when his manson looked to start work, they found two nos. of boss machine, one Samsung mobile phone, one Poco company mobile phone, cash of Rs.10,000/-, one tulu company pump and some pipes were stolen from the new construction building. Hence, the FIR.

4. Initially, there are four accused persons named in the FIR, whereas the petitioner's name was not there. All the accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by various orders passed by the learned trial court. The petitioner was absconding, therefore, NBW was issued against him. Thereafter, while executing the NBW in relation to the present case, the petitioner was apprehended on 09.11.2025 and since then the petitioner is in custody. Since all other co-accused persons have already enlarged on bail, the petitioner is seeking bail on parity.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that the petitioner is also involved in another case, namely, CT (Special) (NDPS) Case No. 5 of 2025 arising Page 2 of 3 out of P.R. No. 95 of 2025-26 dated 11.07.2025, however in that said case he was granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 24.09.2025 in BLAPL No. 9796 of 2025.

6. Regard being had to the nature of allegation and the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.11.2025, I am inclined to enlarge the accused-Petitioner on bail.

7. Hence, the Petitioner is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions:

(1) The petitioner shall appear before the Court diligently without fail, on every date of hearing;
(2) He shall not influence any of the witnesses related to this case in any manner whatsoever; and (3) He shall not commit any offence while on bail.

In the event, the petitioner is found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit.

Ashok

8. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 18-Dec-2025 19:48:45 Page 3 of 3