IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2400 of 2025 Ramakanta Parida @ Kalia @ Kamalakanta …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Deepak Kumar Sahoo, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Tapas Kumar Acharya, ASC CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 24.04.2025 F.I.R. No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 0230 27.12.2016 Mahanga Mahanga P.S. Case No.230/2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No.904/2016 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C, Mahanga Sections 457, 395 of the I.P.C and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with Mahanga P.S. Case No.230/2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No.904/2016 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C, Mahanga registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 457, 395 of the I.P.C and Section 25 and 27 Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 01-May-2025 18:36:14 Signature Not Verified of the Arms Act, has filed this application for his release on bail. 4. The brief fact of the case is that during the night of 24th December, 2016 when the father of the informant was sleeping in his shop adjacent to the shop of his son some unknown persons entered into the shop of the informant and committed theft of mobile phones, LED TV, DVD player, Mobile card and cash of Rs.6,740/-. Accordingly, an F.I.R was lodged. Upon lodging of the F.I.R and conclusion of investigation, the Petitioner was arrested and has been languishing in custody since 14.02.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the present Petitioner. He further submits that such type of offences is not tolerable in a law abiding society. He further submits that there are twenty- eight numbers of criminal cases pending against the present Petitioner. He, accordingly, prays for dismissal of this BLAPL. 7. Considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, character of evidence appearing against the Petitioner and the stringent punishment prescribed, this Court is of the view that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the Petitioner has no role in the offence alleged or not Designation: Personal Assistant likely to commit any such offence. The prayer for bail being devoid of any merit stands rejected. 8. Accordingly, this BLAPL is dismissed. (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge Ayaskanta Designation: Personal Assistant