p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.10629 of 2025 Bapina Jena …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Nayak, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 06.01.2026 03. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.T. Case No.03 of 2025 pending on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act, Cuttack arising out of EOW, Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.04 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 419/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471/ 120-B of I.P.C. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that he has been implicated in the case at hand only because of his alleged acquaintance with principal accused, Sarat Chandra Sahoo, who is p. 2 stated to be absconding. Hence, he may be protected by pre-arrest bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that since the investigation is at a crucial stage, protecting the petitioner by pre-arrest bail would derail the ongoing investigation. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, on instruction, submits that he has no criminal proclivity. 6. Taking into account the nature of allegations qua the Petitioner and his co-operation during ongoing investigation, it is directed that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioner shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper subject to verification of criminal antecedent. 7. If it comes to fore that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent, this order shall not be given effect to. 8. It is needless to state that the Petitioner shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation. 9. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. U.C.C. as per rules. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Soumya Designation: Jr. Stenographer