p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Laxmidhar Aruk (In BLAPL No. 9652 of 2025) Sunil Kumar Jena (In BLAPL No. 9750 of 2025) … Petitioners Mr. B.R. Dalai, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 03.02.2026 03. 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 Hindol PS Case No. 151 of 2025 corresponding to GR case No. 434 of 2025 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Hindol for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 103(1)/109(1)/3(5) of BNS r/w Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, on the main allegation of firing at the deceased Prahallad Pradhan resulting in his death when the deceased and staff had conducted raid to nab the accused persons who were there for poaching wild animal. 4. In the course of hearing, Mr. Biswa Ranjan Dalai, learned counsel for the Petitioners without disputing the fact submits that there is in fact no p. 2 allegation against the petitioners for either firing at the injured or committing murder of the deceased, rather the main allegation of firing at the deceased is directed against co-accused Sibaram Pradhan who all of a sudden snatched away the gun of the deceased and fired at him and, therefore, no overt act having been attributed to the petitioners, they may kindly be granted bail. 4.1. On the other hand, Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. PP without disputing the facts submits that although the petitioners had not fired to the deceased, but they were present at the spot to poach wild animal, but subsequently, all of them had attempted to kill the members of the raiding party and, therefore, the bail applications of the petitioners may kindly be rejected. 5. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence as alleged against the petitioners vis- a-vis the accusations sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioners in custody since 25.05.2025 with submission of charge sheet in the meantime and the main allegation of firing at the deceased all of a sudden being directed against co-accused Sibaram Pradhan who is not before this Court in this bail application and the only allegation leveled against the petitioners being for there presence at the spot and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety including the circumstance under p. 3 which the deceased was done to death and keeping in view the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial, this Court without expressing any view on merits admits the Petitioners to bail, but subject to certain conditions. 6. Hence, these two bail applications of the petitioners namely Laxmidhar Aruk & Sunil Kumar Jena in BLAPL Nos. 9652 and 9750 of 2025 are allowed and each of the petitioners is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each with two solvent sureties 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) The petitioner shall cooperate in the trial by attending the Court on each date of posting unless his attendance is dispensed with by the learned trial Court and In case the petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.269 of BNS, 2023 in accordance with law and (ii) 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 three(03) months p. 4 from the actual date of their release from the custody. The IIC of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioners unnecessarily after recording their attendance beyond the time as stipulated. 7. Accordingly, these BLAPL Nos. 9652 and 9750 of 2025 stand disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. (G. Satapathy) Judge Priyajit