Page 1 of 5. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.3764 of 2026 Umakanta Sandh @ Bikash Sandh ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Debidutta Mohapatra -versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. - Smt. S.Nayak, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 11.05.2026 Order No. 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the Anticipatory Bail Application as well as the F.I.R. 3. This is an application under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 filed by the Petitioner for anticipatory bail, involving offence punishable under Sections 69/296 & 351(3) of B.N.S. in G.R. Case No.339 of 2026 in the Court of learned S.D.J.M. Bolangir arising out of Puintala P.S. Case No.59 of 2026. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the present case filed by the victim and her Page 2 of 5. family member. He further submitted that as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. the Petitioner and the victim had a love relationship for over seven years before the marriage of the victim to another person. It has been admitted that they had consensual physical relationship. Since the marriage of the victim was fixed elsewhere, the victim got married but two days after her marriage the victim divorced her husband and came back to her own village and re-established relationship with the present Petitioner. After divorce when the family of the victim fixed her marriage with a second husband, again the victim approached the present Petitioner with whom she had physical relationship. The Petitioner told the victim that she should get married to the person fixed by the family and later on he will bring her and thereafter they will get married. She has also stated that on 24.02.2026, when the Petitioner went to meet the victim at the backyard of her house in the evening hours and while they were having physical relationship, they were caught by her family members. Accordingly, the present F.I.R. has lodged against the present Petitioner alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 69/ 296/ 351(3) of the B.N.S. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that relationship between the Petitioner and the victim was consensual. He further contended that the Petitioner has been forced by the family member of the victim to marry the victim girl. He further submitted that both the victim as well as the Petitioner are major and they had kept physical Page 3 of 5. relationship between them with their consent. He further contended that the present F.I.R. has been lodged by the victim only under the pressure of her family members. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that no case is made out against the present Petitioner under the alleged sections. Therefore, the Petitioner ought to be released on pre-arrest bail on any terms and condition as would be fixed by this Court. 6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are grave and serious in nature. She further submitted that the accused Petitioner kept relationship with the victim and promised to marry her. Finally, the Petitioner has breached the victim and did not marry her. She further submitted that from the allegation made in the F.I.R., it appears that the Petitioner exploited the victim sexually on the pretext of marriage. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State submitted that the allegation made in the F.I.R. are very serious in nature, therefore the Petitioner should not be enlarged on bail. 7. On a careful analysis of the factual background of the present case, further taking note of the prosecution allegation as well as the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., this Court found that admittedly both the Petitioner and victim are known to each other and they were having a love relationship since the last several years. It is also Page 4 of 5. evident that the victim got married to a person decided by her family and when that marriage did not work out, the victim got a divorce and came back to her village. Again, the Petitioner and victim continued with their previous relationship. Nowhere in her statement has the victim stated that the Petitioner had compelled her to keep physical relationship with him. Taking into consideration the fact that both are major and are fully capable of understating what they have stated, particularly in the absence of any act of coercion or compulsion by the present Petitioner, this Court at this juncture cannot rule out the possibility of false implication of the present Petitioner. Though such aspect is to be decided during a full blown of trial after evidence is given from both sides. However, in the fact and circumstances the present case, this Court constrained to believe that the conduct of the Petitioner was not forcible and that there was consent from both sides in the relationship. 8. At this juncture, learned counsel for the Petitioner sought for liberty to surrender before the Court below and move an application for bail. 9. Considering such submissions, the Petitioner is permitted to surrender before the learned court in seisin over the matter within a period of three weeks from today and move an application for bail. In such eventuality, learned court in seisin over the matter shall release the Petitioner on bail subject to such terms and conditions as the learned Magistrate may deem just and proper with further conditions that:- Page 5 of 5. I. shall not harass, threaten or terrorize the informant and her family members in any manner whatsoever; II. shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court till conclusion of the investigation. III. shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence is required by the I.O for the purpose of investigation; and IV. shall appear before the learned trial court during trial on each date of posting, unless his personal appearance is dispensed with by the learned trial court. Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 10. The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. (A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Rubi