Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.2223 of 2026 Babaji Malik & Ors. ..... Petitioners Represented by Adv. - Niranjan Lenka -versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. - Smt. S.Nayak, A.S.C. Mr. Achyutananda Pattanaik, Adv. for Informant CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 21.04.2026 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 appearing for the Opposite Party-State. 3. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. by the Petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Nikirei P.S. Case No.35 of 2026, corresponding to G.R. Case No.66 of 2026, pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Kendrapara, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 109(l), 115(2), 117(2), 118(2), 126(2), 296, 303(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioner No.1 does not want to press the bail application. Page 2 of 3. 5. So far, Petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are concerned, it is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contended that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further submitted that except for Petitioner No.3, Petitioner Nos.2 to 5 do not have any criminal antecedents. So far Petitioner No.3 is concerned, she is having one criminal antecedent. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that the Petitioner Nos.2 to 5 be released on bail on any stringent terms and conditions. 6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to the release the Petitioner Nos.2 to 5 on pre-arrest bail on the ground that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are grave and serious in nature. She further contended that the released the Petitioner Nos.2 to 5 on pre- arrest bail at this stage would severely affect the investigation work. 7. Mr. A. Pattanaik, learned counsel appearing for the Informant, also objected to the release of the Petitioner Nos.2 to 5 on bail on the ground that the seriousness and gravity of the allegations made in the F.I.R. 8. Considering the nature of allegation, gravity of offence and the surrounding facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner Nos.2 to 5. However, it is directed that in the event the Petitioner Nos.2 to 5 surrender before the Court in seisin over the matter within a period of three weeks from today and move an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the matter shall release them on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, but subject to verification of criminal Page 3 of 3. antecedent of the Petitioners. In the event it is found by the learned court below that the Petitioner No.3 is having more than one criminal antecedent and Petitioner Nos.2, 4 & 5 is having any criminal antecedent, then this order shall automatically stand revoked. Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail. 9. Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Rubi