Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6973 (ORI)

ARUNI @ ARUNEE GARUD v. STATE OF ODISHA

ABLAPL/8210/2026 · 2026-07-24

V Narasingh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 8210 of 2025 1. Aruni @ Arunee Garud 2. Rudradeb Jayapuria 3. Mithun Jayapuria 4. Deben @ Debendra Garud 5. Sumit Garud 6. Gourab @ Gourav Garud …. Petitioners Mr. A.K. Raut, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. C.R. Swain, AGA Ms. S.L. Dhal, Adv.(Informant) CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 24.07.2025 01. 1. Learned counsel, Ms. S.L. Dhal submits that she has instruction to appear on behalf of the Informant and she undertakes to file vakalatnama. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant. 3. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.T. Case No.575 of 2026 pending on the file of learned JMFC-I (Cog. Taking), Jharsuguda, arising out of Brajrajnagar P.S. Case No.123 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 109/117(2)/115(2)/296/126(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. p. 2 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the incident has happened without any premeditation during a feast and hence that ought not to weigh with this Court in considering the prayer for pre-arrest bail. 5. Learned counsel for the State as well as Informant oppose the prayer for pre-arrest bail. 6. This Court perused the injury report indicating that the injured has suffered grievous injury. 7. It is stated at the Bar that Petitioner No.3 has criminal antecedent. 8. Considering the nature of allegation and the injury report, this Court is not inclined to entertain this application in respect of the Petitioner No.3 (Mithun Jayapuria). However, in the event the said Petitioner No.3 surrenders before the learned Court in seisin in the aforesaid case and moves an application for his release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit. 9. So far as Petitioner Nos.1, 2, 4 to 6 are concerned taking into account the nature of allegations, this Court is not inclined to entertain the ABLAPL in respect of the said Petitioner Nos.1, 2, 4 to 6 (Aruni @ Arunee Garud, Rudradeb Jayapuria, Deben @ Debendra Garud, Sumit Garud & Gourab @ Gourav Garud) respectively may surrender before the learned JMFC-I (Cog. Taking), Jharsuguda in p. 3 connection with the aforementioned case within one month from today. In the event of their surrender and motion for bail, the same be considered by the learned JMFC-I (Cog. Taking), Jharsuguda on merits, in the first hour of the day. In the event of rejection of the prayer for bail by the learned JMFC-I (Cog. Taking), Jharsuguda, the Petitioner Nos.1, 2, 4 to 6 are at liberty to move the higher forum for bail in the second hour on the same day. 10. On being so moved, the higher forum is requested to make an endeavour to dispose of the bail application of the Petitioner Nos.1, 2, 4 to 6 on the same day. The case diary shall be made available to the concerned courts to facilitate disposal of the bail application of Petitioner Nos.1, 2, 4 to 6 and learned JMFC-I (Cog. Taking), Jharsuguda is called upon to transmit the case record to the higher forum at the earliest in the event of rejection of such bail application. 11. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. U.C.C. as per rules. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Ayesha