Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.1997 of 2026 Subal Kumar Sahoo ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Siddharth Prasad Mishra -versus- State of Odisha (Vigilance) ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. – S.K. Das, Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 22.04.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department- Opposite Party. Perused the bail application as well as the F.I.R and other documents attached to the bail application. 3. The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with Balasore VIG P.S Case No.34 of 2020, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Balasore for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 409 of the IPC read with 13(2), 13(1)(c) of PC Act. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this Page 2 of 3. matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since date of arrest in connection with the abovenoted vigilance case. He further submitted that in the meantime the investigation has progressed substantially and the charge sheet is likely to be filed very soon. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the Petitioner, hence, the Petitioner be released on bail on any stringent terms and conditions. He further contended that since the Petitioner was working as a Secretary of Cooperative Society, therefore, there is no chance of absconding. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and conditions which the Petitioner shall abide by scrupulously. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department on the other hand contended that the allegations made against the Petitioner are very serious in nature. In course of his argument, he also referred to the instruction dated 24.02.2026, submitted before this Court as per the allegation the Petitioner has misappropriated a sum of Rs.76,02,312/-. A copy of the instruction has already been filed before this Court. On perusal of the said instruction, this Court observed that after the Petitioner was taken into custody, the investigation is still on. However, in the instruction, it has been stated that the custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is no more required. 6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, further taking note of the Page 3 of 3. gravity and seriousness of the allegation as well as the fact the investigation has progressed substantially and further keeping in view the period of custodial detention of the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions. 7. Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter. 8. It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper. Violation of any other conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail application. 9. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer