Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9480 (ORI)

BIJAYA SOM v. STATE OF ODISHA

ABLAPL/595/2026 · 2026-01-29

R K Pattanaik

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 595 of 2026 Bijaya Som …. Petitioner Ms. N. Khan, Advocate -Versus- State of Orissa …. Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Lenka, ASC And ABLAPL No. 606 of 2026 Jigyansu Pattanayak @ Jigyanshu Pattnaik …. Petitioner Mr. H. Mohanty, Advocate -Versus- State of Orissa …. Opposite Party Mr. S. K. Lenka, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 29.01.2026 01. 1. Both the ABLAPLs are disposed of by the following common order. 2. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 3. Instant petitions under Section 482 BNSS are filed seeking pre-arrest bail of the petitioners in connection with p. 2 G.R. Case No.394 of 2025 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M (S) Court, Cuttack arising out of Lalbag P.S. Case No.179 dated 3rd May, 2025 on the grounds stated. 4. Gone through the contents of the FIR as at Annexure-1. Recorded the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties. It is submitted to the Court that there is no direct involvement of any of the petitioners in the alleged mischief. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for one of the petitioners in ABLAPL No.606 of 2026 submits that the said accused had been to the firm with the other petitioner and there is no any direct evidence to show his involvement in the mischief with the submission that they had been to collect the documents and subsequently proposed to open an account in a Bank. Recorded the objection of the learned counsel for the State. The said petitioner was the Senior Sales Executive of Jana Small Finance Bank and had accompanied the other accused, namely, Bijaya Som to the firm, however, from the FIR, it is made to understand that there has been an illegal transaction of Rs.21,58,446/- received in an account opened thereafter after having been unsuccessful in getting a loan sanctioned in favour of the informant. The Court considering the nature of allegations revealed from Annexure-1 is not inclined to consider plea of pre-arrest bail of the petitioners, however, is of the view that both should be directed to surrender before the learned court below seeking regular bail. 5. Accordingly, it is ordered. Page 3 of 3 6. In the result, the ABLAPLs are disposed of with the direction as aforesaid. It is directed that in the event, the petitioners surrender before the court of learned S.D.J.M (S) Court, Cuttack within a fortnight from today in connection with G.R. Case No.394 of 2025 corresponding to Lalbag P.S. Case No.179 dated 3rd May, 2025 and move for bail, it shall be considered and disposed of during first hour and in the event of rejection, they shall have the liberty to approach the learned Sessions Court during the second hour for orders for being considered taking into account the plea that there is no criminal antecedent against them. 7. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Rojina Designation: Junior Stenographer