Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2842 of 2026 Manoj Kumar Patra @ Motilal @ Moti ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Bharat Chandra Patra -versus- state of odisha ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – U.C. Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 01.05.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State- Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court. 3. The present bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with S.T Case No.12 of 2026 in connection with C.T. Case No.1252 of 2025, arising out of Bisoi P.S. Case No.188 of 2025, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Rairangpur for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 310(2) of the BNS. 4. In the course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner by referring to the TI parade report and statement of the victim, submits that the victim himself has wrongly identified the present Page 2 of 3. petitioner, but the informant has correctly identified the petitioner, however, the informant is a person, who cannot be trusted for identification because he was not present at the scene of occurrence, however, the petitioner is in custody since 14.10.2025 and in the meantime, charge sheet has already been submitted, but the present petitioner being allegedly involved in another case, has already been granted bail by this Court in BLAPL No.313 of 2026 and, therefore, there would not be any impediment to grant bail to the present petitioner in this case. Accordingly, Mr.Patra prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State by relying upon the TI parade report submits that since the petitioner has been identified by one of the identifying witness, his bail application may kindly be rejected. 6. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, the FIR has been registered against four named persons including the petitioner and six unknown persons, but the allegation is for committing robbery of Rs.200/- from the victim, however, the petitioner has not got number of criminal antecedents except one case in which he has already been granted bail. It is not in dispute that the victim has wrongly identified the petitioner in the TI parade. Additionally, coaccused Bulu Lohar has already been granted bail by this Court in BLAPL No. 671 of 2026. In the aforesaid facts and circumstance and taking into account the materials so placed on record and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in custody and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety including the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial, Page 3 of 3. this Court without expressing any view on merit, admits the petitioner to bail. 7. Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter. 8. It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper. Violation of any other conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail application. 9. It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner shall be subject to the verification of his criminal antecedent. In the event, the Petitioner is having more than one criminal antecedent, then this order shall stand automatically revoked. 10. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer