p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2953 of 2026 Surai Hansdah @ Majhi …. Petitioner(s) Mr. S.K. Patnaik, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party(s) Ms. S. Devi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 01.05.2026 01. 1. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Rairangpur Rural P.S. Case No.68 of 2025 corresponding to S.T. Case No.41 of 2025 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 85/108 of BNS, pending in the court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rairangpur. 2. The petitioner had approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rairangpur in S.T. Case No.41 of 2025 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 03.02.2026 rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail p. 2 application, no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 4. The prosecution as per the F.I.R. is that on 05.05.2025, the informant alleged that his sister, Salma Murmu, married the present petitioner as per their caste and customs. On 02.05.2025, on Friday, his sister, along with her husband and two nephews of the informant, proceeded to village Dukhia Sahi under Bangiriposi P.S. to attend the get-together. But the present petitioner returned to his house from Bangiriposi. On 04.05.2025 at about 12 Noon, Salma Majhi, along with her two daughters, returned to her house, Baghiatangar. After returning to her house, the present petitioner had committed murder to her sister and hanged her on a tree. The present petitioner also tortured her and threatened to kill her in life. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and at the instance of the brother of the deceased the present FIR has been registered. He further submits that the informant who is the brother of the deceased has demanded money from the petitioner and on refusal of the same, the FIR has been registered. Charge sheet in the present case has been filed on 26.09.2025 and the petitioner is in custody since 09.07.2025. 6. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 7. Learned counsel for the State produced the case diary. Perusal of the case diary, particularly the post mortem report reveals that the death is due to combine effect of asphyxia and various congestions resulting from hanging, p. 3 which was suicidal in nature. Moreover, the minor son of the deceased, namely, Karia Majhi, who is an eye witness, in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has stated that her mother has committed suicide. 8. Regard being had to the nature of allegation and the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.07.2025, I am inclined to enlarge the accused-Petitioner on bail. 9. Hence, the Petitioner is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions: (i) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till the disposal of the trial; (ii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each date on which the case is posted for trial; (iii) He shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever; (iv) He shall not commit any offence while on bail, and (v) He shall be released on bail subject to verification of similar type of antecedents. In the event, the petitioner is found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit. p. 4 10. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Ashok MOHAPATRA