p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 3897 of 2026 Kalinga Mohanty and others …. Petitioner(s) Mr. P.K. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha another …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. J. Naik, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 29.04.2026 01. 1. The petitioners are accused in connection with Balichandrapur P.S. Case No. 105 of 2026 corresponding to C.T. Case No.501 of 2026 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 85/296/115(2)/351(2)/ 109(1)/3(5) of BNS, pending in the Court of the learned JMFC, Chandikhol. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction from the petitioners, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioners is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 3. The prosecution case is that the marriage of the p. 2 informant was solemnised with the petitioner No.1 on 23.02.2025 who is the son of the petitioner No.2 and 3 and brother of the petitioner No.4. It is alleged that at the time of the marriage the family of the informant had given a sum of Rs.3,80,000/- for dress and procession (bata kharcha) along with gold ornaments to the bridegroom along with that several household articles and ornaments were also gifted to the informant and the ornaments were forcibly kept in a locker, and the petitioner lived well for two months after the marriage but thereafter due to interference of the in-law members there was dissensions arose between the informant and the petitioner and thereafter for demand of further dowry there was a quarrel in the house by the petitioner no.1 and the informant and subsequently the petitioner No.2 to 4 left the informant at Ahamdabad in the service place of the petitioner No.1, but there also due to demand of a flat and Bullet motor cycle the petitioner No.1 assaulted and attempted to kill the informant and even the other petitioner abused the informant in filthy language, but the complainant after some interval again went to the house of the petitioners but the petitioner No.2 to 4 kept on demanding a flat and a vehicle from the father of the informant and when the same was not fulfilled the petitioner No.2 to 4 assaulted the informant and the petitioner No.2 tried to kill the informant by means of a pillow but she p. 3 became senseless, and subsequently the petitioners ousted the informant from their house and thereafter though the father of the informant arranged money for return of the informant but the in-laws of the informants are not allowing her to their house. Hence, the FIR. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that at the instance of the wife of petitioner no.1, the FIR has been registered. Petitioners no.2, 3 and 4 are the in-laws of the informant. He submits that petitioner no.1 initiated a civil proceeding under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act on 02.01.2026. As a counterblast to the said proceeding, the wife of the petitioner no.1 has filed the present FIR. Reading of the FIR and other documents placed on record indicates that this case is essentially arising out of a matrimonial dispute. 5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. 6. Regard being had to the nature of allegation and gravity of offence, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event the Petitioners are arrested, they shall be released on bail by the Arresting Officer, subject to verification of criminal antecedent of similar nature. The release of the Petitioners shall also be p. 4 subject to the condition that they shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O. as and when their presence is required by the I.O. for the purpose of investigation; they shall not indulge in similar criminal offences while on bail; they shall not threaten/harass/terrorize the informant in any manner whatsoever while on bail; and they shall appear before the trial court on each and every date of posting of the case, if not presented by sufficient cause. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail. 7. The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Ashok MOHAPATRA