IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 12498 of 2025 Ramlal Kanta and another …. Petitioner(s) Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. S.C. Pradhan, ASC Mr. Gopal Agarwal, Sr. Advocate (ED) CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 23.12.2025 02. 1. The petitioners are accused in connection with Padampur P.S. Case No. 317 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1182 of 2025 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 126(2)/296/79/304/318(4)/ 351(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, pending in the Court of the learned SDJM, Padampur. 2. The petitioners had approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Padampur in B.A. No. 199 of 2025 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 20.11.2025 rejected the bail application of the petitioners. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction from the petitioner, 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. 4. The prosecution case, reveals from the FIR is that the informant Debahuti Pradhan alleged that on 27.10.2025 at about 9:45 PM while her husband was suffering from Corona at that time she had taken cash of Rs.1,00,000/- from the petitioner No. 1 and mortgage her land. Thereafter, it is alleged that to return the land, the petitioner no.1 demanded 50 Lakhs money or else registered the land in their name. It is further alleged that, they have kidnapped her son and abuse obscene language. Hence the FIR. 5. The learned State Counsel has read out the statement of the informant recorded by the police. As per the statement, the entire allegations are primarily made against the petitioner no.1. Although petitioner no.1 is 71 years of age, but he is involved in two other cases, i.e., Padampur P.S. Case No. 83/2023 under sections 347/387 IPC read with section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act and another is Padampur P.S. Case No. 317/2025 under sections 126(2)/296/79/304/318(4)/351(2)/ 3(5) of BNS read with section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act. 6. The petitioners are in custody since 28.10.2025 and charge sheet has not yet been filed. 7. Mr. Gopal Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the ED submits that though the FIR has been registered under Section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, but the ED has not even registered any complaint. He further submits that police does not have any jurisdiction to investigate the case of present nature in view of the Bar under section 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act. 8. Be that as it may, regard being had to the nature of allegation against petitioner no.2 and his period of custody since 28.10.2025, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner no.2 on bail. 9. Hence, the Petitioner no.2 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: (1) The petitioner no.2 shall appear before the IO diligently without fail, and default in appearance before the IO or trial court even for once will entail withdrawal of the concession of bail granted by this Court; (2) He shall not influence any of the witnesses related to this case in any manner whatsoever; and (3) He shall not commit any offence while on bail. (4) He shall be released on bail subject to verification of similar type of antecedents. In the event, the petitioner no.2 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 to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit. 10. In so far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, liberty is granted to the petitioner no.1 to renew the bail application before the learned trial court and the learned trial court shall consider the same keeping in view the age of the petitioner no.1 and the nature of allegation against him so also the materials available on record. 11. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Ashok Designation: Secretary