IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2349 of 2026 Daitary Mallik …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Nayak, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party Mr. Sanjay Das, Standing Counsel (Vigilance) CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 27.04.2026 01. 1. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No.5 of 2026 corresponding to V.G.R. No. 03 of 2026 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 7/12 of P.C. (Amendment) Act, 2018, pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Balasore. The petitioner had approached the learned Special Judge, (Vig.), Balasore in VGR No. 03 of 2026 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 02.03.2026 rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 3. The prosecution case is that on 18.02.2026 at about 05.10 P.M., one Saheb Khan Kadari, the informant lodged F.I.R. against the present Petitioner along with another alleging therein that, on behalf of his brother, he has been managing the vehicles (Dumpers) bearing Regd. Nos. OD04-F- 5585, OR09-G-4311, OR22-C-2029, OD02-AB-2311 and OD16-D-4917. The informant alleged that, on the relevant date, while those Vehicles were parked at Bagudi Stone Quarry near Soro N.H. side being loaded with boulder stone, the Petitioner i.e. the Tahasildar, Soro reached there and searched the documents of the Vehicles. It is further alleged that, thereafter the Tahasildar asked the drivers of the Vehicles to produce the Challan Papers of the said Vehicles for transportations of the boulder stone. Since, the drivers could not produce the any documents regarding transportation of boulder stone, the Tahasildar, Soro brought those Vehicles to Soro Tahasil Office. It is further alleged that on 12.02.2026, the informant met the Tahasildar, Soro in his office and requested him to release those seized Vehicles, but the Tahasildar, Soro demanded RS. 1,00,000/- as bribe for not sending the Vehicles to Mining Office, but to send the said vehicles to Police Station for early release. Thereafter, the informant agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 40,000/-, but the Tahasildar, Soro did not agree. It is further alleged that, thereafter on 17.02.2026 the informant again met the Tahasildar, Soro in his residential house and requested him to release those Vehicles and accordingly the Tahasildar, Soro told the informant to bring Sri Dayanidhi Jena, the Vice- President of Soro Truck Association with him. Thereafter, the informant along with Dayanidhi Jena went to the quarter of the Tahasildar, Soro and after some discussion, the Tahasildar, Soro agreed to receive Rs. 40,000/-through Dayanidhi Jena for forwarding the Vehicles to the Police Station. 4. Mr. Sanjay Das, learned counsel for the Vigilance Department by relying upon the written instruction opposed the bail plea. He submits that in the present case preliminary charge sheet has already been filed on 18.04.2026 and the petitioner has been in custody since 20.02.2026. 5. Regard being had to the nature of allegation and the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2026, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the I.I.C. of the concerned Police Station on every last Sunday of the month between 10.00 A.M. and 12.00 Noon for at least three months; (ii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till the disposal of the trial; (iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each date on which the case is posted for trial; (iv) He shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever; (v) He shall not commit any offence while on bail, and Ashok (vi) He shall be released on bail subject to verification of similar type of antecedents. In the event the petitioner is found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit. 7. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge MOHAPATRA