p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.5076 of 2025 Sankarsena Gouda @ Sankar Gouda … Petitioner Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 12.02.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is an application U/S.483 of the BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Dharakote P.S. Case No.357 of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No.43 of 2025 (G.R. Case No.1936 of 2024) pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, for commission of offence punishable U/Ss.103(1)/3(5) of BNS, on the main allegation of committing murder of deceased Panchanan Gouda by assaulting him with lethal weapons along with co- accused in furtherance of their common intention. 3. In the course of hearing, Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner by inviting attention of the Court to the facts of the charge sheet, submits that even if the case of the petitioner is taken into consideration, the deceased being the aggressor for attacking the petitioner and his brother, who in retaliation attacking the deceased, no case U/S. 103(1) p. 2 of BNS is made out against the petitioner and there being no direct evidence available on record and the petitioner having detained in custody for a substantial period, he may kindly be granted bail. 3.1. On the contrary, Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. PP by placing the post mortem report submits that not only the deceased was done to death, but also the deceased had sustained 11 serious injuries on his person and there was prior enmity between the parties as per the statement of the complainant and, thereby, the petitioner being seen by some of the witnesses going towards the spot along with his brother being armed with weapons, the petitioner can be well considered to be the prime accused in this case and he, thereby, should not be granted bail at this stage, when the trial is yet to begin. Accordingly, Mr. Patra prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner. 4. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the petitioner for committing murder of the deceased, but there is no direct evidence available against the petitioner, however, the cause of death of the deceased is homicidal in nature as opined by the doctor conducting post mortem report. Further, the deceased had sustained around 11 injuries on his person and the complainant has allegedly stated against the petitioner for having prior dispute between the parties and threatening to take away the life of the deceased. Page 3 of 3 5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the materials collected in support of the allegation against the petitioner together with the other circumstances on record in entirety, this Court does not consider it proper to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, especially when the material witnesses are yet to be examined. Hence the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the Court in seisin over the matter for reference. (G. Satapathy) Judge S.Sasmal Designation: Jr. Stenographer