p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.1189 of 2026 Tofan Bastia @ Suvendu Bastia … Petitioner Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate -versus- State of Orissa … Opposite Party Mr. T.K. Acharya, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL):18.03.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Paradeep Model PS Case No.08 of 2026 corresponding to GR Case No.42 of 2026 pending in the file of learned JMFC(P), Kujanga for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.105 of BNS r/w Sec.184 and 185 of MV Act, on the main allegation of committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder by dashing the deceased with a car-MG Hector riding it in a rash and negligent manner. 3. Heard Mr. Amitav Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record. 4. The argument which was advanced by the State counsel to refuse bail to the petitioner is that the petitioner had the required knowledge and he was very much aware that driving on a public road in a rash and negligent manner would likely to cause death of someone, if the vehicle hits such person, but despite having such p. 2 knowledge, the petitioner drove the vehicle in high speed and in a reckless manner and caused the accident killing one innocent person. Whether the petitioner was having requisite knowledge or not or whether he was driving the offending vehicle with such knowledge as would likely to bring others in danger of death, if the vehicle hits, are definitely question of facts and can be gone at the trial. Further, whether the petitioner had caused the accident by consuming liquor is also a question of fact which can be determined at the trial but at this stage, there is prima facie allegation against the petitioner for commission of offences punishable U/S.105 of BNS which is punishable not less than five years, but may extend to ten years or imprisonment for life. 5. It is not in dispute that the deceased had succumbed to injuries sustained in an accident. Besides the petitioner is in custody since 17.01.2026, but in the meantime, charge-sheet has already been submitted, however, it is not known as to when the trial would commence and when it would complete. It is highly unnatural to keep a person in confinement merely on the expectation that one day trial would be completed, but it is always to be remembered that bail should not be withheld as a pre-trial punishment and the guilt or innocence of an accused can be ascertained after a full fledged trial. Whatever there is on record is at best allegation against the petitioner, but it cannot substitute the place of proof, however, the allegation needs to be subsequently verified p. 3 and scrutinized in the course of trial and the same is subject to proof. In the aforesaid facts and situation and taking into account the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in custody with completion of investigation, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits the petitioner to bail. 5. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) only with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following condition:- (i) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.269 of BNS, 2023 in accordance with law; 6. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 7. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference. (G. Satapathy) Judge Jayakrushna