p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.9596 of 2025 Sanatan Muduli & another …. Petitioners Mr. Achyutananda Pattanaik, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party Ms. Suvalaxmi Devi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 23.09.2025 01. 1. The petitioners are accused in connection with Ranpur P.S. Case No.187 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.285 of 2025 registered on the allegation of the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 80(2)/85/103(1)/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Ranpur. The petitioners had approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nayagarh in B.A. No.112/298 of 2025 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 14.08.2025 rejected the bail application of the petitioners. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying for enlargement on bail. p. 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction from the petitioners, submits that except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioners is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that on 19.06.2025 at about 9.30 P.M., the informant alleged that her daughter had got married with the petitioner no.1. After marriage, she was tortured by her husband and in-laws both physically and mentally on demand of dowry. After marriage, she was blessed with a girl child. On 19.06.2025, her in-laws contacted her over phone and informed about the death of her daughter. On getting this information, she reached at the hospital at Bhubaneswar. Hence, the F.I.R. 4. The petitioner no.1 is the husband of the deceased whereas the petitioner no.2 is the mother-in-law. This is a case of poisoning. 5. The petitioners are in custody since 21.06.2025. There is no direct and specific allegation against the petitioner no.2. She is a lady of 55 years. Hence, at this stage, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner no.2- Usharani Muduli on bail. 6. Regard being had to the period of custody of the petitioners since 21.06.2025 and the petitioner no.2 p. 3 being a lady and there is no direct or specific allegation against the petitioner no.2, I am inclined to release the petitioner no.2- Usharani Muduli on bail. 7. Hence, the petitioner no.2- Usharani Muduli is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions: (i) The petitioner no.2- Usharani Muduli shall appear before the Court below on each date of hearing without fail. (ii) She shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till the disposal of the trial; (iii) She shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever; and (iv) She shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) She shall not influence the witness in the present case. (vi) She shall not misuse the concession of bail granted to him. (vii) She shall be released on bail subject to verification of similar type of antecedents. 8. In the event the petitioner no.2- Tapaswini Sahu is found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty p. 4 Subhasis to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit. 9. So far as the petitioner no.1-Sanatan Muduli is concerned, he is granted liberty to move fresh application on bail plea. 10. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Designation: Personal Assistant Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.