p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.2973 of 2026 (1) Sasikanta Mishra (2) Sanatan Sethy …. Petitioner(s) Ms. M.P. Behera, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s) Ms. Suvalaxmi Devi, ASC Mr. Haripad Mohanty, Advocate (for the informant) CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 23.04.2026 01. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Khuntuni P.S. Case No.21 of 2026 corresponding to C.T. Case No.70 of 2026 registered on the allegation of the commission of offences under Sections 3(5)/316(4)/318(3) of B.N.S., 2023 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Athagarh, Cuttack. 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. p. 2 4. The allegation against the petitioners, as set out in the FIR, in brief, is that on the intervening night of 27.11.2025 and 28.11.2025, a truck bearing Registration No. OD-04-L-5922, driven by Petitioner No. 2, Sanatan Sethy, entered the premises of Aarti Steels Ltd., Ghantikhal, carrying iron ore from Daitari Iron Ore Mines of OMC, District Keonjhar. While the material was being unloaded at the Truck Tippler, it was noticed that the consignment appeared contaminated and was of a different colour and quality than usual. Before the security patrolling team could reach the spot, Petitioner No. 2 (driver) allegedly fled from the tippler site. It is further alleged that the truck owner and driver, in connivance with other persons, had hatched a criminal conspiracy and deliberately sold the genuine iron ore in the local market and replaced it with inferior materials, such as moram clay, during transit, thereby cheating Aarti Steels Ltd. for wrongful gain. The approximate value of the misappropriated material is stated to be Rs. 2,09,456/- p. 3 (Rupees two lakh nine thousand four hundred fifty-six only). 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the F.I.R. was lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay of nearly two months from the date of the alleged occurrence and about one month after the payment of Rs.2,44,186/- indicates that the case has been falsely instituted. She has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of 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. 6. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is a huge racket going on in the Aarti Steels Plant and other places. Therefore, stringent condition should be imposed in the event this Court allows the anticipatory bail application. 7. Regard being had to the submission made by the parties and allegation made against the petitioners, p. 4 I am inclined to grant 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 conditions that the petitioners shall not involve in any other similar cases and the concession of anticipatory bail shall be available to the petitioners in the event they are not involved in any other cases; they shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O. as and when their presence are required for the purpose of investigation. 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