p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.1287 of 2026 Papu Mallick … Petitioner Ms. D. Behuray, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. T.K. Acharya, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL):19.03.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is a bail application U/S.483 of the BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Soro PS Case No. 332 of 2025 corresponding to CT Case No.699 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned JMFC, Soro for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 109(1)/308(3)/351(2)/351(4)/3(5) of BNS r/w Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, on the main allegation of terrorizing the informant with the assistance of co- accused persons by firing at him which missed the target, to pay the “Dada Bati” (extortion of money). 3. Heard, Ms. Dalirani Behuray, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. 4. Bail is in fact sought for to the Petitioner on the ground of parity, but the persons who have been granted bail, have not been named in the FIR nor have they been alleged to have demanded extortion money of Rupees One Lakh from the Informant through Phone p. 2 just few days before lodging of FIR. Additionally, the Petitioner has not only been named in the FIR, but also he is having 19 criminal antecedents which are more or less similar to the present case, however, none of the criminal antecedent of the petitioner has been disclosed in his bail application which is a material omission/suppression. Besides, the bail application of the Petitioner was in fact rejected by this Court in BLAPL No. 11610 of 2025, but there is no material change in circumstance to consider the bail application afresh. In such view of the matter and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the allegation sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the materials placed on record and the alleged involvement of the petitioner in 19 criminal cases keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Neeru Yadav Vrs. State of UP; (2014) 16 SCC 508, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stand rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of the order be immediately sent to the learned trial Court. (G. Satapathy) Judge Priyajit