p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.10745 of 2025 1. Subhapriya Behera 2. Sukanti Behera @ Sukanti Nayak 3. Ramamani Behera 4. Narahari Behera …. Petitioners Mr. S. Senapati, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC Mr. R. N. Rout, Adv. (Informant) CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 22.09.2025 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant. 2. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Special Case No.225 of 2025 pending on the file of learned Special Judge (POCSO Court), Balasore arising out of Soro P.S. Case No.591 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/296/351(3)/75/3(5) of BNS read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act. p. 2 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioners have been arrayed as accused only because they are related to the principal accused one Ashok Kumar Behera. Hence, they may be protected by pre-arrest bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State as well as Informant oppose the prayer for pre-arrest bail. 5. Learned counsel for the Informant submits that notwithstanding the pendency of the bail application, the Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 threaten the victim for which Soro P.S. Case No.742 of 2025 dated 14.09.2025 has been instituted. Hence the Petitioners ought not to be protected by pre-arrest bail. 6. Copy of the said FIR is taken on record. 7. In respect of the said FIR, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the same has been filed making wild allegation only to prejudice this Court while considering the anticipatory bail application of the present Petitioners. 8. Taking into account the nature of allegation and the role ascribed to the present Petitioners, this Court directs that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper. 9. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the Informant, it is directed that the p. 3 Petitioner shall not in any try to threaten or intimidate the victim/her family. 10. It shall be open for the prosecution as well as the victim to seek variance of this order, if there is any threat perception. 11. It is needless to state that the investigation in Soro P.S. Case No.742 of 2025 shall continue in an independent manner notwithstanding the disposal of the present application. 12. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. 13. U.C.C. as per rules. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Santoshi