IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.464 of 2026 Ashatita @Asatita Sahoo … Appellant Mr. P.K.Samal, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and another … Respondents Mr. T.K. Acharya, Addl. PP Mr.S.Pradhan, Advocate for the Informant CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL):28.07.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This criminal appeal in the nature of bail U/S.14-A of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 together with amendment Act, 2016 (in short, “the Act”) is directed against the impugned order dated 21.04.2026 passed in TR Case No.72 of 2026 by which the learned 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under SC & ST(POA) Act, Khurda, has refused to grant bail to the appellant in connection with Nachuni PS Case No.76 of 2025, for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 64(1)/85/296 /115(2)/351(3)/3(5) of BNS r/w 4 DP Act and r/w Sec. 3(l)(r)/3(l)(s)/3(2)(v) of SC & ST (POA) Act, on the main allegation of committing rape upon the victim belonging to Scheduled Caste community by taking advantage of her caste and subsequently marrying her as well as subjecting her to torture and cruelty for demand of dowry, along with co-accused persons in furtherance of their common intention. 3. Heard, Mr. Prakash Kumar Samal, learned counsel for the appellant; Mr.Soumyajeet Pradhan, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. At the outset, Mr.Pradhan opposes the prayer of the appellant for bail tooth and nail by contending inter alia that the appellant in fact has prevented for recording the statement of the victim U/S. 183 of BNSS. 4. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the appellant vis-a-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the appellant in custody with other circumstances on record in entirety including the statement of the victim and the inherent right of the accused-appellant to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial and charge sheet having already been submitted, this Court without expressing any view on the merits, considers it proper to admit the appellant to bail. 5. Hence, the CRLA stands allowed and the impugned order is, hereby, set aside. Consequently, the appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by the learned Court in seisin over the matter. 6. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference. (G. Satapathy) Judge kishore