p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2367 of 2026 Dayanidhi Jena …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Bhanjadeo, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha (Vig.) …. 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, p. 2 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 the informant reported the matter before the police with an allegation that on 11.02.2026 the informant was managing the vehicles (Dumpers) bearing Registration No.- OD04-F-5585, OR09-G-4311, OR22-C-2029, OD02-AB-2311 and OD16-D-4917 on behalf of his brother. The further case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence while all those vehicles were loaded with boulder, stone parked at Bagudi Stone quarry near Soro NH side, then at that time the Tahasildar, Soro reached at the spot and searched the vehicles. The further case of the prosecution is that on being asked the drivers of the vehicles were unable to produce any documents to that effect. It is further alleged that the said Tahasildar brought the said vehicles to Soro Tahasil and subsequently on 12.02.2026 the complainant met with the Tahasildar, Soro (co-accused person) at his office and requested to release the vehicles. It is further alleged that subsequently the said co-accused person demanded Rs.1,00,000/- as bribe for not forwarding the vehicles to the mining office, but to send the vehicles to the police station for the early release of the aforesaid vehicles subject to payment of fine. It is further alleged that the complainant agreed to pay Rs. 40,000/- on which Tahasildar did not agree to receive the same, then on 17.02.2026 at about 2.00 p.m. the complainant again met with the said co-accused person at his residential house and requested him to release the vehicles. It is further alleged that the said co-accused person stated to the complainant to bring the petitioner who is the Vice President p. 3 of Soro, Truck Owners Associations. It is further alleged that after some discussion then the co-accused person agreed to receive Rs.40,000/- through the petitioner for sending those vehicles to the police station. It is further alleged that the complainant subsequently reported the matter before the SP Vigilance (VG, Balasore) for taking legal action against the co- accused person. It is further alleged that basing upon the said report the complainant, the vigilance people seized the bribe money amounting to Rs.40,000/- from the pocket of the petitioner and accordingly the vigilance people prepared a report along with detection report and apprehended the petitioner in presence of the witnesses. 4. Mr. Sanjay Das, learned counsel for the Vigilance Department by relying upon the written instruction opposed the bail plea of the petitioner. 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 p. 4 Ashok 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 (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