IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Jagadish K. Behera @ Jagadish Kumar Behera (In BLAPL No.461 of 2025) Hrudayananda Muni (In BLAPL No.2282 of 2025) … Petitioners Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate (For BLAPL No. 461 of 2025) Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate (For BLAPL No. 2282 of 2025) -versus- State of Orissa … Opposite Party Mr. C. Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 22.07.2025 08. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these two 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 Baidyanathpur PS Case No.567 of 2024 corresponding to GR Case No. 2613 of 2024 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Berhampur for commission of offences punishable Under Sections 120-B/419 /420/ 464/ 465/ 467/ 468/ 470/471/473/474/506 of IPC, on the main allegation of cheating the Informant and his relatives for a sum of Rs. 27,50,000/- on the pretext of providing job to them. 4. Heard, Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No. 461 of 2025; Mr. Saroj Kumar Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No. 2282 of 2025 and Mr. C. Mohanty, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. 5. Mr. Sahoo and Mr. Dash by filing separate affidavits stated to be sworn in by the relative of the Petitioners inform this Court that each of the Petitioners would deposit a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs(total Rs.5 lakhs) in the name of the Informant as condition for grant of bail and rest of the amount, the Petitioners would clear after being released on bail 6. In view of the above facts and after having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioners vis-a-vis the accusations sought to be brought against them and on going through the materials placed on record and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the Petitioners in custody since 04.12.2024 and keeping in view the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and the affidavits filed on behalf of the Petitioners, this Court without expressing any view on merits, admits each of the petitioners to bail. 7. Hence, these two bail applications of the petitioners namely Jagadish K. Behera @ Jagadish Kumar Behera and Hrudayananda Muni stand allowed and each of the petitioners is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:- (i) Without prejudice to the right and contention of the parties, the Petitioners- Jagadish K. Behera @ Jagadish Kumar Behera and Hrudayananda would deposit a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs each (total Rs.5 Lakhs) in the name of the Informant and produce the proof of such document before the learned trial Court as a condition for grant of bail, (ii) the petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail, (iii) the petitioners in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless their attendance are dispensed with. In case the Petitioners fail without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioners for offence U/S.269 of BNS,2023 in accordance with law and (iv) the petitioners shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a fortnight preferably on a Sunday in each month in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for six (06) months from the actual date of release from the custody. Page 4 of 4 The IIC of the Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioners unnecessarily after recording their attendance beyond the time as stipulated. It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioners in future for grave/similar Act on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, these BLAPL Nos. 461 and 2282 of 2025 stand disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. (G. Satapathy) Judge Priyajit