p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.12936 of 2025 Muktikanta Nayak and another … Petitioners Mr. S. Mishra-1, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. P. Satpathy, Addl. PP Mr. P. Panda, Advocate (Informant) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL):05.05.2026 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Basudebpur PS Case No.713 of 2025 corresponding to GR Case No.1134 of 2025 pending in the file of learned JMFC, Basudebpur, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.85/80(2)/103(1)/3(5) of BNS r/w Section 4 of DP Act, on the main allegation of committing murder and dowry death of their daughter- in-law by subjecting her to torture and cruelty for demand of dowry, along with co-accused persons in furtherance of their common intention. 3. Heard, Mr. Sidhartha Mishra-1, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Parsuram Panda, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. p. 2 4. 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 allegation sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the materials placed on record together with the opinion of the doctor as to cause of death of the deceased in the PM report, which is opined to be due to asphyxia arising out of smothering by soft material and there being injuries to the person of the deceased as detected in the PM report and the deceased having suffered unnatural death within four months of her marriage while remaining in her matrimonial home and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety including the allegation against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to any of the petitioners at this stage. 5. Hence, the bail application of the petitioners’ stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned Court in seisin over the matter. (G. Satapathy) Judge Subhasmita