p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.2683 of 2026 (1) Jaya Narayan Pattanayak (2) Laxminarayan Mohanty (3) Sujata Mohanty …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Rabi Narayan Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Jateswar Naik, AGA 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 Baliapanda P.S. Case No.43 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.180 of 2026 registered on the allegation of commission of the offences under Sections 329(3)/296/351(3)/308(4)/3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Puri. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction from the petitioners, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of p. 2 the petitioners are pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.02.2026 at about 3:42 P.M., the petitioners allegedly came to the house of the informant, demolished the boundary wall, and abused him as well as his security personnel in filthy and derogatory language. It is further alleged that they threatened to kill the informant if he proceeded with the construction of the boundary wall in future. Hence, the F.I.R. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute arose because of construction of boundary wall in the land of the complainant. There is a counter case filed by the petitioners against the complainant and their family members being Baliapanda P.S. Case No.42 of 2026. The investigation in the present case and the counter case is still going on. Learned counsel further 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 as well as p. 3 Pramod Kumar Ray vrs. State of Orissa reported in (2017) 67 OCR 309 to substantiate his case. 6. Regard being had to the submission of 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 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. 7. With this observation, the ABLAPL is disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Swarna