IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Jiban Pradhan (In BLAPL No.12800 2025) Harekrushna Patra @ Kanha & others (In BLAPL No.12549 of 2025) … Petitioners Ms. D.Nanda, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 12800 of 2025) Mr. D.K.Mohapatra, Advocate (In BLAPL Nos. 12549 of 2025) -versus- State of Orissa … Opposite Party Mr. C.Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 24.12.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these two bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. These are applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Dharuadihi P.S. Case No.04 of 2025 corresponding to ST Case No. 194/40 of 2025 pending in the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sundargarh for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 103(1)/61(2)/238(a)/3(5) of the BNS, on the main allegation of committing murder of one Chandan Dharua by assaulting him with knives. 4. Heard Ms. Diptirekha Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 12800 of 2025, Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners in BLAPL No. 12549 of 2025 and Mr. C.Mohanty, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record. 5. Bail is mainly sought for to some of the accused persons/petitioners on the ground that they have not participated in the crime, but a careful perusal of record would go to disclose allegation against the petitioners for committing murder of the deceased Chandan Dharua by assaulting him with knives and the PM report discloses number of incised wounds on the person of the deceased and cause of death has been opined by the Doctor conducting post mortem to be due to haemorrhage and shock resulting out of the injuries to respiratory system. Further, there appears seizure of CCTV footage allegedly capturing some part of the incident, so also recovery of weapon of offence i.e. knives pursuant to the disclosure statement of petitioner Arun Nayak. In that view of the matter and taking into account the nature and gravity of offences as alleged against the petitioners vis-à-vis the allegations sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the materials collected in support of the allegation against the petitioners and taking into account the other circumstance on record in entirety including the brutality exhibited in commission of the crime and the role as alleged against the petitioners, this Court does not feel it proper to grant bail to the petitioners. 6. 6. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner Jiban Pradhan(BLAPL No. 12800 of 2025) and Harekrushna Patra @ Kanha & others(BLAPL No. 12549 of 2025) stands rejected. 7. Accordingly, both the BLAPLs stand disposed of. (G. Satapathy) Judge kishore