p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2104 of 2026 R. Akash Behera …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Basudev Pujari, Advocate Mr. Sarbeswar Sahoo, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Jateswar Naik, AAGA CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 22.04.2026 03. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Khandagiri P.S. Case No.520 of 2024 corresponding to C.T. Case No.1390 of 2024 on the allegation of the commission of the offences under Sections 376(2)(n)/450/506 of I.P.C. pending in the Court of the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Special Court, (POCSO), Bhubaneswar as Crl. Tr. No.276 of 2025. Page 2 of 4 3. The petitioner had approached the learned Court below praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 05.02.2026 has rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 praying for enlargement on bail. 4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the eve of Makar Sankranti, the informant went to her elder sister’s house situated at Radhanathnagar, Dumduma, Bhubaneswar, and stayed there for about ten days. It is alleged that, although the residential house was small, the informant also occasionally stayed at her aunt’s (piusi’s) house, which is located nearby. It is further alleged that, taking advantage of her being alone, the present petitioner entered the house, committed sexual intercourse with the informant, and recorded the incident on his mobile phone. When the informant protested, the petitioner allegedly threatened to publish the video and also threatened her with dire consequences. Due to shame and fear, the informant did not disclose the incident to anyone. It is also p. 3 alleged that the incident was repeated on the following days, and thereafter the informant returned to her native village, Belaguntha, without informing anyone about the occurrence. After some time, the informant noticed a gradual increase in the size of her abdomen. Suspecting a medical issue, her mother administered certain medicines to her for about six months, but without any improvement. Subsequently, upon consulting a doctor, it was revealed that the informant was carrying a pregnancy of about six months. Thereafter, the informant disclosed the entire incident to her family members, and a village meeting was convened on 28.07.2024. It is further alleged that the present petitioner threatened the informant and her family members with dire consequences, including threats to kill. 5. Mr. Pujari, learned counsel for the petitioner while insisting for grant of bail to the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix and other important witnesses have already been examined. p. 4 6. I have perused the evidence of the prosecutrix. She has made specific allegation against the petitioner. It is also evident from her evidence that she became pregnant due to her relationship with the petitioner and a child was born out of the said relationship. 7. At this stage, Mr. Pujari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the DNA mapping of the child was also conducted. However, the copy of the DNA report has not been given to the petitioner though it is the part of the record. 8. Regard being had to the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an application with a request before the learned trial Court for obtaining the DNA report and after obtaining the DNA report, he may renew his bail plea before the trial court, if so advised. 9. With this observation, the BLAPL stands disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Swarna