RASMITA SWAIN @ SMT. RASMITA SWAIN v. STATE OF ODISHA
BLAPL/4854/2026 · 2026-06-19
V Narasingh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21045 (ORI) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21045 (ORI) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.4854 of 2026
Rasmita Swain @ Smt. Rasmita Swain …. Petitioner
Mr. A. K. Sahu, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. C. R. Swain, AGA
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
Order No.
ORDER 19.06.2026
02.
1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
2. The Petitioner is accused in connection with G.R. Case No.1153 of 2025 pending on the file of learned S.D.J.M., Jeypore, arising out of Jeypore Sadar P.S. Case No. 304 of 2025 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023.
3.
Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioners relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court.
4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s.483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by the learned Sessions p. 2 Judge, Koraput by order dated 05.05.2026 in the aforementioned cases, the present BLAPL has been filed.
5. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 19.10.2025, the informant, Ms. Lipsa Das, Branch Manager, Odisha Grameen Bank, Ambaguda Branch, reported that Rasmita Swain, proprietor of Lipsa General Store, had availed a Mudra Cash Loan of ₹15,00,000/- by hypothecating her business stock. It was alleged that after availing the loan, she misappropriated the loan amount, removed the hypothecated stock, closed the shop, and absconded to evade repayment. Based on the report, Jeypore Sadar P.S. Case No. 304 dated 19.10.2025 was registered under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) BNS, and investigation was taken up by ASI S.K. Sahu.
6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the accusation is on account of default in payment of loan and since chargesheet has already been filed on 28.02.2026, the Petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
7.
Learned counsel for the State opposes such prayer, inter alia, on the ground that the Petitioner has antecedent of similar nature.
8. Considering the nature of allegations and that the Petitioner is a lady and her husband who suffers from disability which is on record, this Court directs p. 3 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.
9. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.
(V. NARASINGH)
Vacation Judge Jina