IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2916 of 2023 CNR No. ODHC010216752026 Sashikanta @ Sasikanta Behera … Petitioner Mr. S.Bahadur, Advocate -versus- State of Orissa … Opposite Party Mr. S.C.Pradhan, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 20.08.2026 03. I.A. No. 342 of 2026 1. Mr.Samarendra Bahadur, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to not press the IA. Accordingly, the present IA stands disposed of as not pressed. BLAPL No. 2916 of 2026 2. This is the bail application U/S.439 of CrPC by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Soro PS Case No.225 of 2020 corresponding to ST Case No.61 of 2021 pending in the file of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Soro, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of IPC, on the allegation of committing murder of two persons namely Kartika Behera and Iswar Behera, along with co-accused persons. 3. In the course of hearing, Mr. Samarendra Bahadur, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the prosecution case is taken at its face value, no case U/S. 302 of IPC is made out against the petitioner, rather it is a case of sudden provocation and thereby, the petitioner can at best be held liable for offence U/S. 304 Part-II of the IPC which is punishable up to imprisonment for ten years and thereby, the petitioner having already been in custody for a substantial period, may kindly be granted bail. 3.1. On the other hand, Mr. S.C.Pradhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that not only 23 witnesses have already been examined, but the trial is on the verge of completion and there is prima facie evidence against the petitioner for committing murder of two persons and thereby, the petitioner should not be granted bail. 4. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the materials placed on record together with the stage of the case and there being evidence against the petitioner keeping in view the trial being likely to be concluded in near future, this Court does not consider it proper to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 5. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within six months hence. A copy of this order be immediately communicated to learned trial Court for compliance. (G. Satapathy) Judge kishore