p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Ananta Kumar Das (In BLAPL No. 12349 of 2025) Khageswar Sahoo @ Kanhu (In BLAPL No. 9734 of 2025) Satyanarayan Sahoo @ Kanha @ Satyanarayan Sahu (In BLAPL No. 10157 of 2025) Santosh Kumar Sahoo @ Santu (In BLAPL No. 12548 of 2025) … Petitioners Mr. S.R. Mulia, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 12349 of 2025) Mr. D.P. Pradhan, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 9734 of 2025) None (In BLAPL No. 10157 of 2025) Mr. PK. Mishra, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 12548 of 2025) -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. S.C. Pradhan, Addl. PP Mr. A.K. Budhia, Advocate(Informant) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 25.02.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these four 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 GR Case No. 669 of 2025 arising out of Baranga p. 2 PS Case No. 243 of 2025 pending in the file of learned JMFC(II), Cuttack for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 310(3)/103(1)/326(f)/61(2) of BNS, on the main allegation of committing murder with dacoity of the deceased Sk. Rahil Ali and setting fire to his vehicle. 4. Heard, Mr. Satya Ranjan Mulia, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No. 12349 of 2025; Mr. Durga Prasad Pradhan, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No. 9734 of 2025; Mr. Pramoda Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No. 12548 of 2025; Mr. Arun Kumar Budhia, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record, but none appears for the Petitioner-Satyanarayan Sahoo @ Kanha @ Satyanarayan Sahu in BLAPL No. 10157 of 2025, however, this Court by perusing the materials on record disposes of all the four bail applications. 5. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the Petitioners for committing murder with dacoity and and setting fire to the vehicle of the deceased and in the meantime, charge-sheet has already been submitted awaiting for trial. The offences alleged against the Petitioners are not only serious, but also grave and there are eye witnesses account to the occurrence, but it is claimed that the implication of the Petitioners are on the basis of confession before Police, p. 3 but whether the implication of the Petitioners is solely on the basis of confession before Police or not can be ascertained in the course of trial. Further, the punishment provided for the offence alleged against the Petitioners is for life or death. In the aforesaid facts and situation 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 regard being had to the materials placed on record and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Petitioners. 6. Hence, these four bail applications of the petitioners stand rejected. Accordingly, these BLAPL Nos. 12349, 9734, 10157 and 12548 of 2025 stand disposed of. A soft copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned trial Court. (G. Satapathy) Judge Priyajit