IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.4539 of 2025 Chinmayananda Panda & Junu Panda …. Petitioner Represented By Adv. Mr. Ramani Kanta Pattanaik -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Represented By ASC Ms. Gayatri Patra CORAM: DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No.01 ORDER 13.05.2025 F.I.R . No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 0040 23.01.2025 Badagada C.T. Case No.69 of 2025 arising out of Badagada P.S. Case No.40 of 2025 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C.-IV, Bhubaneswar Sections 318(2)/318(4)/3 33/115(2)/109(1 )/351(2)/61(2) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 25/27 of Arms Act 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 is in custody in connection with C.T. Case No.69 of 2025 arising out of Badagada P.S. Case No.40 of 2025 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C.-IV, Bhubaneswar, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 318(2)/318(4)/333/115(2)/109(1)/351(2)/61(2) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 25/27 of Arms Act, has filed this petition for his release on bail. 4. It is alleged by the informant that one Debashish Das lodged an F.I.R. at Baragada P.S. alleging therein that he has a real estate office at BJB Nagar. On 23.01.2025 at 1 PM one Manas Bhoi made him a phone call asking him to come to the office to take the money which he (Manas Bhoi) owed to him. Accordingly informant went to the office and saw that Manas Bhoi has come to his office with Lingaraj Mohanty and Budhia and two others in a Bolero car. The partners of the informant were also present in the office. At about 2 PM while Manas and Ajit were discussing amongst themselves, Budhia and his associates entered inside the chamber of the informant and asked the informant to sign on a bond paper stating him that he was not entitled to any amount. When the informant protested, there was scuffle, during which the person holding the gun assaulted the informant by means of the said gun. As a result of which, he sustained injuries. The business partner of the informant also intervened into the matter and the person with the gun opened a fire. As a result of which said Pradosh Kumar choudhury got seriously injured and he was taken to hospital. It is stated that Manas had taken a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- from the informant for a piece of lands which he did not provide. The informant had asked to return the money for which the incident happened. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no involvement whatsoever in the alleged offences as claimed by the prosecution. He further submits that the Petitioner is the only lady member of her house for which her presence in her house is highly required. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 10.04.2025. Accordingly, it is prayed that the Petitioner be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations. 7. Considering the nature of gravity of the accusation, character of evidence appearing against the petitioner, the stringent punishment provided, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, the BLAPL is dismissed. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order pas per Rules. (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge Sumitra