p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.3942 of 2026 1. Daitari Khara 2. Jagannath Kinchei @ Gundu @ Jaganath …. Petitioner(s) Mr. A.K. Sahu, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. P.S. Nayak, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 06.05.2026 01. 1. The petitioners are accused in connection with Paper Metla P.S. Case No. 03 of 2019 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 146 of 2021 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, pending in the court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Malkangiri. 2. The petitioners had approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Malkangiri in C.T. Case No. 146 of 2021praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 26.03.2026 rejected the bail application of the petitioners. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction from the petitioners, submits that, except the present bail application, p. 2 no other bail application of the petitioners is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 4. The prosecution case as per the F.I.R. is that on 29.05.2019 at about 3.00 PM the informant lodged a written report before the police station, inter alia, alleging that on 28.05.2019 at about 4 PM her husband Raghunath Jalla (40) S/o Late Guru Jalla had been to Badpada to attend a marriage ceremony but did not return to her house in the said night. She thought that her husband might have stayed in the night at Podpada. So without worry, she slept. On 29.05.2019 at about 5.00 AM she got information from one Padma Tangul and Gupta Galel of Badpada that her husband Raghunath Jalla was lying dead at Pata Rangeni, Badapada. Getting such information, she along with her daughter proceeded to Pata Rangeni, Badapada and found blood oozing out from his nose, mouth and ear and one ligature mark was also found around the neck of her husband. So she suspects that somebody has committed murder of her husband. Hence, the case. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier the petitioners had approached this Court by filing BLAPL No.6941 of 2019 and the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.12.2019 admitted them to bail. However, due to default in appearance before the learned trial court, the trial court issued NBW against the petitioners on 04.01.2025. On execution of the NBW, the petitioners were taken into custody on 22.03.2026 and since then they are in custody. 6. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 7. Regard being had to the nature of allegation, the fact that p. 3 earlier the petitioners have granted bail and the period of judicial custody of the petitioners since 22.03.2026, I am inclined to enlarge the accused-Petitioner on bail. 8. Hence, the Petitioners are directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions: (i) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till the disposal of the trial; (ii) They shall appear before the trial Court on each date on which the case is posted for trial, if not presented by sufficient cause; (iii) They shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever; (iv) They shall not commit any offence while on bail, and (v) They shall be released on bail subject to verification of similar type of antecedents. In the event, the petitioners are found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit. 9. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Ashok MOHAPATRA