p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.15 of 2026 Sujit Kumar Nayak … Appellant Mr. S.R.Das, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & another … Respondents Mr. R.B.Mishra, Addl.PP Mr.S.K.Baral, Advocate for Informant CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL):09.03.2026 04. 1. This criminal appeal Under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 together with amendment Act, 2016 (in short, “the Act”) in nature of bail is directed against the impugned order dated 16.09.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar in TR Case No. 474 of 2025 arising out of Balianta PS Case No. 415 of 2025 refusing to grant bail to the appellant for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 75(2)/77/78(2)/351(3)/3(1)(r)/ 3(1)(5) of BNS read with Sec. 3(1) (r)(s)/3(1)(s) of SC & ST (POA) Act, on the main allegation of developing intimacy with the victim belonging to “SC” Community and subsequently obtaining her nude and obscene photographs and forcing thereafter to keep physical relationship with him by taking advantage of her caste. 2. Heard, Mr.Soumya Ranjan Das, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr.Susanta Kumar Baral, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.R.B.Mishra, p. 2 learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. 3. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the appellant vis-à- vis the accusations sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the pretrial detention of the appellant in custody since 28.08.2025 with submission of charge sheet in the meantime and taking into account the other circumstance on record in entirety including the statement of the victim and keeping in view the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial, this Court considers it proper to admits the appellant to bail. 4. Hence, the Criminal Appeal stands allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside. Consequently, the appellant be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) 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 conditions:- (i) the appellant shall not contact the victim in any way or any manner and he shall not visit to the house, street or village of the victim and (ii) the appellant shall not threaten, induce, influence or coerce any of the witnesses including the family members of the victim acquainted with the facts of the p. 3 case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts before the Court. 5. It is, however, brought to the notice of the Court that the copy application of statement of the victim was rejected and the rejection copy thereof was produced before this Court for perusal. Hence, before parting, this Court requests the learned Sessions Judge, Khurda and the Judge-in-Charge Copying to see as to how the accused was not supplied with copy of the 183 BNSS statement of the victim by rejecting the copy application of the accused-appellant and that too, at the stage where charge has already been framed. This Court, however, trusts and believes that the aforesaid issue would be properly addressed to by them in future since supply of such statement of the victim of sexual assault to an accused at the stage of Sec. 207 of CrPC/230 of BNSS and subsequent thereof is generally not prohibited and it can be supplied to an accused subject to the provision of Sec. 207 of CrPC/230 of BNSS. 6. Accordingly, the CRLA stands disposed of. A soft copy of this order be supplied to the learned Sessions Judge, Khurda and the Judge-in-Charge of Copying Section for information and guidance. (G. Satapathy) Judge kishore