IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 3085 of 2026 Brahmadatta Mohanty @ Dipu Mohanty …. Petitioner Mr. R.K. Panda, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 24.04.2026 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No. 303/2026 pending on the file of learned Court SDJM, Puri, arising out of Cyber Crime & Economic Offences P.S. Case No.09 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under Section 66(C)/ 66(D) of the Information Technology Act and Sections 318(4)/ 336(2)/ 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is not a named accused and the basis of the implication is on account of the co-accused statement. Hence, he may be protected by pre-arrest bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail relying on the statement of one Sahadev Pradhan so also the statement of Prasant Kumar Mohapatra who is the co-accused. 5. It is trite that in the stage of consideration of the bail, the statement of the co-accused can be taken into account. 6. In this context respectful reference is made to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kalyan Chandra Sarkar vs Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav & Anr, AIR 2005 SC 921. 7. Taking into account the nature of allegations and the offence being a cyber fraud, this Court is not inclined to ensconce the Petitioner by pre-arrest bail. However, in the event the Petitioner surrenders before the learned Court in seisin in the aforesaid case and moves an application for his release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit. 8. The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Jina