IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 3585 of 2026 Gupta Sahu …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Dwibedi, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 05.05.2026 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner is an accused in connection with C.T. Case No.81(A) of 2018, pending on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhawanipatna, arising out of Madanpur Rampur P.S. Case No.55 of 2017, for commission of alleged offences under Sections 120-B/399/402 of IPC read with Section 4 & 5 of Explosive Substances Act and Section 25 of Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court. 4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.483 of BNSS by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna, by order dated 13.02.2026 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed. 5. That the prosecution case in short is that on 11.03.2017 Informant lodged a written report alleging therein that on the same day at about 1:30 pm while he along with other staffs were performing patrolling duty in Bhatapada area at about 12:15 pm he received information that some criminals of the locality have congregated in a lonely place of the village of Agadhupur. After getting such information he along with other staffs were proceeded to the spot and conducted raid. During raid they noticed that 6 persons were taking alcohol sitting in a circle and out of those 6, 3 persons of them managed to escape from the spot. However, the informant could able to nab 3 persons including the petitioner and other general allegations are there. Basing on such report, the aforementioned PS case was registered. 6. Referring to the impugned order of rejection, it is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner who was on bail could not appear after commitment resulting in issuance of NBW(A). 7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that such nonappearance was because of supervening circumstances arising out of the onset of pandemic Covid-19 and the Petitioner has been taken to custody on execution of NBW(A). 8. It is stated that the co-accused who faced trial in the spilt up has since been acquitted, as stated in the order of rejection. Hence, the Petitioner may be released on bail. 9. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. 10. Taking into account the nature of allegations, period in custody and acquittal of the co-accused as noted, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin so as to ensure his presence during the trial. 11. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 12. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Ayesha