Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.4102 of 2026 Kumar Chandra Nayak and another ..... Petitionesr Represented by Adv. - Krushna Chandra Dash -versus- State Of Odisha and another ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Smt. S. Nayak, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 01.05.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the Anticipatory Bail Application as well as the F.I.R. 3. This is an application under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 filed by the Petitioners for anticipatory bail, involving offence punishable under Sections 308/318(4)/319(2)/340 of B.N.S. in FIR No.19 of 2026 registered in Intelligence Fusion & Strategic Operations IFSO/CCU Special Cell, Sector-16/C, Dwarka, Delhi Police. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners at the outset contended that being aggrieved by the notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS issued by the Intelligence Fusion & Strategic Operations Page 2 of 3. IFSO/CCU Special Cell, Sector-16/C, Dwarka, Delhi Police, the Petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present pre- arrest case. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that an FIR bearing FIR No.19 of 2026 has been registered on 19.01.2026 by the Delhi Police, Special Cell registering a case for commission of offence punishable under Sections 308/318(4)/319(2)/340 of B.N.S. The abovenoted notices have been issued under the provisions of the section 35(3) of BNSS for interrogation of the Petitioners in connection of the aforesaid crime and they have been directed to appear before the concerned Inspector on 09.04.2026. 6. On perusal of the record it appears although the Petitioners have been noticed under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to appear before the concerned Inspector on 09.04.2026, however, the Petitioners have not appeared as they are apprehending their arrest by the Delhi Police Special Cell in connection with the present case. Learned counsel for the Petitioners in course of his argument submitted that it is standard procedure of the Special Cell, Delhi Police to issue notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and to detain and arrest the persons to have been summoned pursuant to such notice. Thus, learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that they have reasonable apprehension of being arrested by the Delhi Police. 7. This Court on a careful consideration of the factual background of the present case is of the view that the case has been registered by the special cell of Delhi Police. As such, the cause of action arose beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. Page 3 of 3. 8. In view of the aforesaid position, this Court is of the view that the present pre-arrest bail is not maintainable before this Court, therefore, the Petitioners are required to approach the Jurisdictional High Court. Considering the apprehension, this Court grants three weeks transit bail to the Petitioners to approach the Jurisdictional High Court by filing the pre-arrest bail application. 9. With the aforesaid observation, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Sisir Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT