p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2951 of 2026 Rahul Behera @ Babulu Behera …. Petitioner(s) Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party(s) Ms. S. Devi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 01.05.2026 01. 1. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Hindol P.S. Case No.20 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.54 of 2026 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections l09(l),115(2),126(2),296,351(2) of BNS, pending in the court of the learned SDJM, Hindol. 2. The petitioner had approached the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in BLAPL No. 99 of 2026 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 18.03.2026 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. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail p. 2 application, no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 4. The prosecution as per the F.I.R. is that on 22.01.2026 at about 3.00 P.M. while the informant was gossiping with another villager near Lotus Restaurant, at that time accused reached there and started quarrelling with him and when he asked as to why he is quarrelling with him, the accused persons abused him in filthy languages and assaulted him by means of lathi for which he sustained injury. Somehow he managed to escape from there and due to his serious condition, his father shifted him to medical for treatment. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the same incident the father of the petitioner has also registered a cross FIR being Hindol P.S. Case No. 19 of 2026 for alleged commission of offence punishable under sections 3(1)(r)/3(1)(s)/23(2)(va)/115(2)/296/3(5)/333/351(2)/74 of BNS. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, to which the State Counsel has not controverted. The petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2026. 6. Regard being had to the nature of allegation and the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 06.03.2026, I am inclined to enlarge the accused-Petitioner on bail. 7. 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: p. 3 (i) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till the disposal of the trial; (ii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each date on which the case is posted for trial; (iii) He shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever; (iv) He shall not commit any offence while on bail, and (v) 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. 8. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Ashok MOHAPATRA