IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.12748 of 2025 Om Prakash Mishra …. Petitioner Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and another …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Panda, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 20.11.2025 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.192 of 2010 pending on the file of learned S.D.J.M., Karanjia, Mayurbhanj arising out of Karanjia P.S. Case No.72 of 2010 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 419/420 of IPC. 3. On perusal of the records as produced by the learned counsel for the State, it is seen that vide order dated 21.09.2010 the learned Sessions Judge, Circuit at Karanjia has passed the following order:- “So considering the facts and circumstances of the case, bail prayer filed U/s 433 Cr.P.C. is allowed for a period of one month from today. In the event of arrest of the petitioner he be released on furnishing bail bond or Rs.10,000/ with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting authority and this anticipatory bail will remain valid for one month.” 4. It is borne out from the record that the Petitioner is stated to have been arrested on 06.10.2010 and thereafter released on execution of bail bond. Though admittedly, the charge sheet in the case at hand has been filed on 18.09.2010 (Annexure-2) citing the Petitioner as an absconder. 5. Referring to the arrest memo, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the ABLAPL is not maintainable. 6. If the chain of events are put in their perspective, it seems that during the currency of the order of interim bail granted by the Sessions Judge, since the Petitioner was taken into custody, he has been released on bail. 7. Evidently, the filing of the charge sheet prior to such order of the learned Sessions Judge was not noted. In fact, had such information been brought to the notice of the learned Sessions Judge for which he passed an order that “in the event of arrest the Petitioners to be released on bail as noted” would not have been passed. Evidently, there has been procedural irregularity in the case at hand for which the Petitioner ought not to suffer. 8. Taking into account the nature of allegations qua the Petitioner and the punishment prescribed, this Court directs that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioner shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper. 9. It is needless to state that the Petitioner shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation. 10. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Jina