p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Chandan Jena (In BLAPL No.11804 of 2025) Abhijit Pattnaik (In BLAPL No.12055 of 2025) Dharmaraj Palei (In BLAPL No.12272 of 2025) … Petitioners Mr. M.K. Chand, Advocate (in BLAPL No.11804 of 2025) Mr. B.B. Routray, Advocate (in BLAPL No.12055 of 2025) Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate (in BLAPL No.12272 of 2025) -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. S.C. Pradhan, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 22.01.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these three 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 Balugaon PS Case No.318 of 2025 corresponding to GR Case No.685 of 2025 pending in the file of learned JMFC, Chilika, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.140(2)/308(7)/310(2) of BNS, on the main p. 2 allegation of kidnapping the victim for ransom and committing dacoity from him for a sum of Rs.6,25,130/-. 4. Heard, Mr. Manas Kumar Chand, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.11804 of 2025; Mr. Bharat Bhusan Routray, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.12055 of 2025; Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.12272 of 2025 and Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. On being queried about the criminal antecedent of the petitioners, learned counsels for the respective petitioners volunteer to withhold bail to the petitioners, if they are found to have any criminal antecedent. 5. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioners vis-à-vis the accusations sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioners in custody since 29.09.2025 with submission of charge-sheet in the meantime and taking into account the freeing of the abductee allegedly by the petitioners and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety including the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial and last but not the least, taking into account the recovery of the robbed amount from the co-accused P. Sushil Dora, who is not before this Court in this case, this Court p. 3 without expressing any view on merits admits each of the petitioners to bail, but subject to verification of their criminal antecedent. 6. Hence, these three bail applications of the petitioners namely Chandan Jena (In BLAPL No.11804 of 2025); Abhijit Pattnaik (In BLAPL No.12055 of 2025) and Dharmaraj Palei (In BLAPL No.12272 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) with two solvent sureties each 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 petitioners shall not contact the injured/abductee or visit to his house or village till disposal of the case, (ii) the petitioners shall not threaten, induce, influence or coerce any of the witnesses including the family members of the injured/abductee acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts before the Court, (iii) 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 six(06) months from the actual date of release from the custody. 7. The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated. This Court, however, reserves the liberty to the abductee and p. 4 the State to file appropriate application for cancellation of bail, if any of the conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. It is made clear that in such event for being approached for cancellation of bail, the learned trial Court would be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 8. Accordingly, these BLAPLs stand disposed of. In view of the specific submission as advanced for the petitioners, the benefit of this order shall not be extended to the concerned petitioners, if he/they is/are found to have any criminal antecedent. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. (G. Satapathy) Judge Subhasmita Designation: Sr. Stenographer