IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Sagar @ Prasanjit Routray (In CRLA No.1359 of 2024) Raka @ Gyanaranjan Sahoo (In CRLA No.1333 of 2024) Chenga @ Rakesh Behera (In CRLA No.470 of 2025) … Appellants Mr. S.K. Bhanjadeo, Advocate (in CRLA No.1359 of 2024) Mr. R. Pradhan, Advocate (in CRLA No.1333 of 2024) Mr. A.S. Paul, Advocate (in CRLA No.470 of 2025) -versus- State of Odisha and another … Respondents Mr. S.C. Pradhan, Addl. PP Mr. B.P. Ojha, Advocate (R-2) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 05.02.2026 06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these three CRLAs 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 criminal appeals U/S. 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 together with amendment Act, 2016 (in short, “the Act”) in nature of bail are directed against the impugned orders dated 23.12.2024/ 06.08.2024/ 18.02.2025 passed in T.R. Case No.69 of 2024 by which the learned 2nd Addl. District & Sessions Judge under SC & ST (PoA) Act, Khurda/1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge under SC & ST (PoA) Act has refused to release the appellants on bail in connection with Khurda P.S. Case No. 228 of 2024, for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 302/ 364/120-B/34 of IPC and Sec.3(1)(r)(s)/ 3(2)(v)(va) of the Act, on the main allegation of kidnapping Gulu @ Manoj Kumar Sethi and assaulting him to death, along with co-accused persons by entering into a conspiracy with each other in furtherance of their common intention. 4. Heard, Mr. Sanjib Kumar Bhanjadeo, learned counsel for the appellant in CRLA No.1359 of 2024; Mr. Ramakanta Pradhan, learned counsel for the appellant in CRLA No.1333 of 2024; Mr. Amlan Shakti Paul, learned counsel for the appellant in CRLA No.470 of 2025; Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. Bishnu Prasad Ojha, learned counsel for the informant in these matters and perused the record. 5. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the appellants for kidnapping and assaulting the deceased to death. Right now the trial is going on and the material witnesses like Shilpa Sethi & Sachikanta Sethi are yet to be examined, no matter the other eye witnesses to the occurrence PWs.2 & 4 have become hostile to the prosecution case. It is, however, advanced for the appellants that co-accused Sonu @ Sunil Sethi & another have already been granted bail, but the accusations against such co-accused are distinguishable from the accusations against the present appellants. Additionally, the evidence of one of the eye witnesses (PW.4) reveals that he had seen mark of assault on the buttock of the deceased and the nails of the deceased were uprooted. In addition, the post-mortem report reveals number of injuries including multiple abrasion, contusion on the person of the deceased and all the injuries were opined to be ante-mortem in nature and could have been caused by hard and blunt forced impact. 6. In view of the above facts and discussion and taking in consideration the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the appellants vis-a-vis the accusations sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the materials placed on record together with the material witnesses stated above being yet to be examined and taking into account the law laid down by the Apex Court in X vs. State of Rajasthan; (2024) SCC OnLine SC 3539, this Court does not consider it proper to grant bail to any of the appellants. 7. Hence, the prayer for bail of the appellants stands rejected. Accordingly, all the three CRLAs vide CRLA Nos. 1359 & 1333 of 2024 and 470 of 2025 stand rejected and dismissed. A soft copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the Court in seisin over the matter for reference. (G. Satapathy) Judge S.Sasmal Designation: Jr. Stenographer