p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.11482 of 2025 Bubu @ Debi Prasad Jena @ Devi Prasad Jena … Petitioner Mr. G. Das, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Another … Opposite Parties Mr. S.C. Pradhan, Addl. PP Mr. S.R. Panda, Advocate (informant) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 02.02.2026 04. 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 Badagada P.S. Case No.556 of 2025 corresponding to T.R. Case No.588 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO)-cum-Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar, for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 363/376(1)/323/506/34 of IPC r/w. Sec.4(2) of the POCSO Act, on the main allegation of kidnapping the victim and committing rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her. 3. Heard Mr. Gorekhnath Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned Addl. PP and Mr. Sandeep Raj Panda, learned counsel for the informant in the matter and perused the record. 4. Mr. Das by filing a comprehensive affidavit informs this Court that the petitioner is having 16 nos. Page 2 of 2 of criminal antecedents, however, the allegation against the petitioner in this case is not only serious, but also grave. Further, it is submitted that in the meantime, charge sheet has already been submitted. Right to fair trial includes fair trial to the victim also, but in this case, the number of criminal antecedents as shown against the petitioner itself is an impediment against the right to fair trial for the victim, if the accused petitioner is released on bail. In such view of the matter 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 and there being number of criminal antecedents reported against the petitioner and keeping in view the presumption as available U/S.29 of the POCSO Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, especially when the victim is yet to be examined. Hence the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court under the changed circumstance of submission of charge sheet. 5. 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