p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.13026 of 2024 Ranjit Prasad … Petitioner Mr. R.K. Nayak, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. R.B. Mishra, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 24.04.2025 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is an application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Laikera PS Case No.182 of 2023 arising out of CT Case No.1297 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned JMFC, Jharsuguda for commission of offences punishable U/S. 394 of IPC & Section 28 of the Arms Act, on the allegation of committing robbery by snatching away a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs) and a Laptop from the informant, along with co-accused persons. 3. Heard, Mr. Ranjan Kumar Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.B. Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. 4. The bail application of the Petitioner is mainly resisted to by the State on the ground of his long p. 2 checkered criminal history, but on the other hand, the Petitioner seeks for bail on the ground of parity in view of release of co-accused Sitaram Sadangi having similar number of criminal antecedents on bail. 5. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the Petitioner for committing robbery, but FIR has been registered against unknown person and the robbed cash and laptop have already been recovered. True it is that pendency of criminal case is of course a ground to deny bail to a person, but when there is no prima facie case, bail cannot be refused to such person merely because of pendency of some criminal cases against him, since grant of bail is rule, but refusal is an exception, however, refusal of bail is a restriction to the personal liberty of an individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the context of this case, especially when co-accused standing on similar footing has already been granted bail, it would improper to deny bail to the present Petitioner merely because of pendency of some criminal cases. 6. For the reason stated hereinabove and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the Petitioner in custody since 11.07.2023 and trial having already commenced but not yet been concluded, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits the Petitioner to bail. Page 3 of 4 7. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only 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 petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail, (ii) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.269 of BNS,2023 in accordance with law, (iii) the petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by intimating his present address of stay to the concerned Court, (iv) the petitioner 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 three (03) months from the actual date of release from the custody. Page 4 of 4 The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated. It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for similar/grave offences on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. (G. Satapathy) Judge Jayakrushna