Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 73530 (ORI)

MANAS DAS v. STATE OF ODISHA

BLAPL/13510/2025 · 2025-12-23

S K Panigrahi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.13510 of 2025 Manas Das ..…... Petitioner(s) Mr. Amlan Shakti Paul, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha ………. Opposite Party(s) Mr. RajdeepPradhan, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER 23.12.2025 Order No. 01. FIR No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 0764 18.09.2025 Dhenka nal Sadar Dhenkanal Sadar P.S. Case No.764 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1384 of 2025 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal Sections 333/296/115(2)/ 118(2)/109(1)/3 51(2) of B.N.S., 2023 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. The petitioner, currently in judicial custody in connection with Dhenkanal Sadar P.S. Case No.764 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1384 of 2025 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal, registered for alleged offences under Sections 333/296/115(2)/118(2)/109(1)/351(2) of B.N.S., 2023, has filed the present application seeking release on bail. 4. The prosecution case, as reveals from the F.I.R., lodged by the informant Rita Patra before the I.I.C., Sadar on 18.09.2025 at about 3 A.M., the present Petitioner who happens to be her son- in-law entered inside her house and assaulted her husband Sarat Chandra Patra, her daughter Santoshi Patra and her Grand-daughter Pari by means of Katuri and hammer. As a result of which, they sustained severe injuries on their person. The Petitioner also assaulted her younger son Sagar Patra, Daughter-in-law Mamata and Nephew Kishan Patra and burnt the household articles kept inside her house. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police was not able to produce the injury report of the informant. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 01.10.2025. Accordingly, it is prayed that the Petitioner be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail. 7. Considering the nature of gravity of the accusation, character of evidence appearing against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, the BLAPL is dismissed. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order pas per Rules. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Sumitra Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER