p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.13986 of 2025 Ashok Kumar Nayak … Petitioner Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. C. Mohanty, Addl. PP Mr. R.K. Panda, Advocate (informant) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 18.02.2026 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 Mancheswar P.S. Case No.125 of 2025 corresponding to C.T. Case No.317 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C.- II, Bhubaneswar, Khurda, for commission of offence punishable U/Ss.314/316(4)/ 318(4) of BNS, on the main allegation of misappropriating a sum of Rs.2,45,59,364/- of Sai Construction Company by forging documents. 3. Heard Mr. Arijeet Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. C. Mohanty, learned Addl. PP and Mr. Rajat Kumar Panda, learned counsel for the informant in the matter and perused the record. 4. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the petitioner for misappropriating the fund of the firm namely Sai Construction by forging documents, but it is stated in the FIR that on mutual discussion, the petitioner in order to settle the matter had issued five A/C. payee p. 2 cheques, but did not come for settlement, however, such cheques have resulted in filing of complaint under 138 of NI Act by the firm Sai Construction. Moreover, it is submitted that the petitioner is an employee of the firm and was drawing salary of Rs.20,000/- per month. It is also not out of place to mention here that apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has approached this Court in ABLAPL No. 5569 of 2025, but a co-ordinate Bench of this Court while disposing such application for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner has inter alia observed in paragraph-9 of the order as “on consideration of rival submission, this Court is persuaded to hold that the petitioner had the mens rea from the inception to commit the offence”. 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 placed on record and there being only five witnesses cited in the charge sheet and trial likely to be concluded within a short span of time, if it commences and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 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