p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Prabina @ Muna Sahu @ Muna Sahoo (In BLAPL No.1979 of 2026) Pradeep Naik (In BLAPL No.1987 of 2026) Sashanka Sekhar Pattnayak (In BLAPL No.2556 of 2026) Sanjil Pradhan (In BLAPL No.6768 of 2026) … Petitioners Mr. Sk. Zafarulla, Advocate (in BLAPL No.1979 of 2026) Mr. S. Panda, Advocate (in BLAPL No.1987 of 2026) Mr. S.C. Mishra, Advocate (in BLAPL No.2556 of 2026) Mr. S. Mohanty, Advocate (in BLAPL No.6768 of 2026) -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. C. Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL):13.07.2026 1 03. 1. These matters are taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these four bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. These are the bail applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Jarpada PS Case No.391 of 2023 corresponding to CT (S) Case No.199 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special p. 2 Judge (Vigilance), Angul, for being charge-sheeted for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.365/302/201/ 34 of IPC, on the main allegation of kidnaping the deceased Bikash Behera and killing him by strangulating and disposing of the dead body to cause disappearance of evidence. 4. Heard, Mr. Sk. Zafarulla, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.1979 of 2026; Mr. Sudipto Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.1987 of 2026; Mr. Subash Chandra Mishra, learned counsel appearing virtually for the petitioner in BLAPL No.2556 of 2026; Mr. Samvit Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.6768 of 2026 and Mr. C. Mohanty, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in these matters and perused the record together with the copy of depositions of PWs.1 to 6 as produced. 5. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the petitioners for kidnapping the deceased and committing his murder, but the primary ground under which bail is sought for to the petitioners is the basis of their implication, however, it is allegedly found that the dead body of the deceased was recovered pursuant to the alleged disclosure statement of the co-accused- petitioner-Sanjil Pradhan. Besides, the cause of death of the deceased was opined by the doctor in the PM report to be homicidal in nature and the investigating agency has also collected some digital evidence in the form of p. 3 CDR/CAF/SDR analysis of some mobile numbers. It is, however, claimed by the petitioners that PW6 namely Mitrabhanu Pradhan, who is a witness to the recovery has not supported the prosecution allegation, however, witnesses like PWs.1 and 4 have testified about the recovery pursuant to the alleged disclosure statement of the petitioner-Sanjil Pradhan. Similarly, it is alleged that the petitioner-Muna Sahoo has allegedly given recovery of the burnt wearing apparels of the deceased in presence of the witnesses. Besides, the movement of the petitioner-Sashanka Sekhar Pattnayak has been allegedly captured in CCTV footage as per the statement of one witness-Sunil Sahoo. It is to be reminded that detail analysis of evidence and meticulous examination of documents on merit should be avoided at the stage of consideration of bail application. 5.1. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into account the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioners vis-à-vis the accusations sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the materials placed on record including the alleged motive behind the crime, which was allegedly for eliminating the deceased to get rid of blackmailing and recovery of dead body and articles used in commission of crime at the instance of the petitioners & co-accused persons and the circumstance under which the deceased was killed and taking into account the evidence of witnesses so far examined, p. 4 more particularly that of PWs.1 and 4, this Court is not inclined to grant any of the petitioners to bail. 6. Hence, these four bail applications of the petitioners namely Prabina @ Muna Sahu @ Muna Sahoo (In BLAPL No.1979 of 2026); Pradeep Naik (In BLAPL No.1987 of 2026); Sashanka Sekhar Pattnayak (In BLAPL No.2556 of 2026) and Sanjil Pradhan (In BLAPL No.6768 of 2026) stand rejected. Accordingly, these BLAPLs stand disposed of. 7. Looking at the custody period of each of the petitioners, it is open for them to renew their prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within six months hence. The petitioners are, however, not precluded to renew their prayer for bail before the trial Court even before the aforesaid six months for any other justifiable grounds. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned trial Court for reference. (G. Satapathy) Judge Subhasmita Designation: Sr. Stenographer