IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 2428 of 2026 Ashish Mirdha @ Ashis Mirdha ..…... Petitioner(s) Mr. Suryakanta Dwibedi, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha ………. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Sonak Mishra, ASC Mr. Parsuram Panda, Adv. (for informant) CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER 27.04.2026 Order No. 01. FIR No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 14 21.01.2026 Rairakhol G.R. Case No.37 of 2026 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Rairakhol Sections 296/108 of BNS, 2023 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 30-Apr-2026 12:33:00 Signature Not Verified p. 2 3. The Petitioner being in custody in Rairakhol P.S. Case No. 14 of 2026, corresponding to G.R. Case No.37 of 2026 , pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Rairakhol , registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 296/108 of BNS, 2023, has filed this petition for his release on bail. 4. The brief fact of the case is that the informant named Debar Mirdha lodged a written report at Rairakhol P.S. to the effect that her deceased daughter Jhuli Mirdha, aged about 23 years, had love affair with the accused for the last 3 to 4 years and eloped with the accused. Subsequently, the family member planned their marriage. The ring ceremony of the deceased with the accused was scheduled on 26.01.2026. But, on 21.01.2026, the accused, over the phone, refused to marry the deceased and abused her. Out of mental agony, the deceased committed suicide by consuming poison. Based on the written report of the informant, Rairakhol P.S. Case No.14 of 2026 was registered under Section 296/108 of BNS. Hence, this case. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the accused person is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further contends that there is no iota of material on record against the Petitioner under the alleged offence. The Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 30-Apr-2026 12:33:00 Signature Not Verified p. 3 Petitioner is in custody since 23.01.2026. Hence, he submits that, the prayer of the present Petitioner may be allowed. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner placed reliance on a decision of Madras High Court in Manikandan v. State1 relying on a judgment of the same High Court in Rajamannar v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Sewapet Police Station, Thirruvallur District2 observed that: “If a lover commits suicide due to lover failure, if a student commits suicide because of his poor performance in the examination, a client commits suicide because of his case is dismissed, the lady, examiner, lawyer respectively cannot be held to have abetted the commission of suicide. Sometimes, the decision to commit suicide might be taken by the victim himself/herself, unaccompanied by any act or instigation etc. on the part of the accused.” 7. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations. 8. Without going into the merit of the case and based on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case with some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions that:- 1 MLJ CRL 240 (2016) Madras High Court 2 Crl. O.P. No.8320/2014 dated 3.04.2014 Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 30-Apr-2026 12:33:00 Signature Not Verified p. 4 i. The Petitioner shall appear before the local Police Station on every alternate Sunday between 10.00 A.M. to 12.00 P.M. till conclusion of the trial.; ii. The Petitioner shall appear before the learned court in seisin over the matter on each date of posting of the case; iii. The Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail. iv. The Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution evidence in any manner. 9. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 10. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. ( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Murmu Designation: P.A.