IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.2660 of 2026 (1) Srikanta Mallik (2) Mamina @ Mami Mallick (3) Pabitra @ Sania Mallick (4) Swata @ Suni Mallick (5) Mita Mallick (6) Sanju @ Sanjulata Mallick …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Debasis Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s) Ms. Suvalaxmi Devi, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 22.04.2026 01. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Brahmabarada P.S. Case No.03 of 2026 corresponding to C.T. Case No.39 of 2026 registered on the allegation of the commission of offences under Sections 109(1)/115(2)/126(2)/296/3(5)/303(2)/324(4)/329(4)/ 351(2)/76 of B.N.S., 2023 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Chandikhole. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction from the petitioners, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioners are pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 08.01.2026 at about 5:00 P.M., the petitioners, without any provocation, allegedly came to the informant’s house, forcibly broke open the door, and trespassed into the premises. It is alleged that they abused the informant in filthy language, dragged and assaulted her with an iron rod, and outraged her modesty. When the informant’s father-in-law protested, he was also abused and assaulted, and upon intervention by the informant’s brother-in-law, he too was subjected to similar abuse and assault. It is further alleged that the accused persons took away the informant’s mangalsutra and caused damage to her motorcycle. Hence, the case. 5. Learned counsel for the State has produced the injury report, which indicates that the injury sustained by the injured, Sita Malik, is simple in nature though in the vital part of the body. She further submits that the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Hence, she opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners on the other hand submits that the petitioners are arrayed as accused along with seventeen other accused persons. The investigation is still going on. He has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vrs. State of Bihar and another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vrs. CBI reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773 as well as Pramod Kumar Ray vrs. State of Orissa reported in (2017) 67 OCR 309 and prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Regard being had to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the nature of offence, I am inclined to admit the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event the petitioners are arrested, they shall be released by the Arresting Officer, subject to the verification of the criminal antecedent of similar nature. The release of the petitioners shall also be subject to the conditions that they shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O. as and when their presence is required for the purpose of investigation; they shall not indulge in similar criminal offences while on bail; 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. 8. With this observation, the ABLAPL is disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Swarna