Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 80901 (ORI)

DEBASIS BARIK @ DEBU v. STATE OF ODISHA

BLAPL/12318/2025 · 2025-12-17

S K Panigrahi

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 12318 of 2025 Debasis Barik @ Debu & Anr. ..…... Petitioner(s) Mr. Ronalisha Pradhan, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha .….... Opposite Party Ms. Sarita Moharana, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER 17.12.2025 Order No. 01 F.I.R. No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 487 30.03.2024 Bharatpur C.T. Case No.1523 of 2023 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C. (LR & LTV), Bhubaneswar Sec 392, 34 of IPC 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. The Petitioners being in custody in Bharatpur P.S. Case No. 487 of 2024 corresponding to C.T. Case No.1523 of 2023 Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 22-Dec-2025 12:54:42 Signature Not Verified 2 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C. (LR & LTV), Bhubaneswar, registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 392, 34 of IPC, has filed this petition for their release on bail. 4. The brief fact of the case is that the informant lodged a written report before the Nayapali P.S. alleging that on 02.11.2023 at 7.10 P.M., two unknown persons came on a bike and snatched her gold chain and locket weighing 15 grams near CET College road, Bhubaneswar. Hence, this case. 5. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case, and there is no credible or incriminating material on record that establishes their involvement in the alleged offences. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 16.08.2024. In view of the foregoing, it is respectfully prayed that the petitioners be enlarged on bail, as their continued incarceration is unwarranted and disproportionate in the absence of any substantial evidence against them. 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail stating that the Petitioners have 37 criminal antecedents. Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 22-Dec-2025 12:54:42 Signature Not Verified 3 7. Without delving into the merits of the case, and considering the overall facts and circumstances, it is directed that the petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case, subject to stringent terms and conditions as may be deemed just and proper by the learned court seisin over the matter, along with the following additional conditions:- i. the Petitioners shall appear before the local Police Station on 1st Monday of every month between 10 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. ii. the petitioners shall not indulge themselves in any criminal offence while on bail; and iii. the petitioners shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution evidence in any manner. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 8. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. ( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Murmu Designation: P.A.