IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 2032 of 2026 Gavar Ritesh @ Retesh Kumar @ G.Ritesh Kumar @ G.Ritish Kumar …. Petitioner Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC Mr. S.G. Das, Advocate (For Informant) CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 22.05.2026 04. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner is an accused in connection with G.R. Case No.09 of 2024, pending on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Paralakhemundi, arising out of Paralakhemundi P.S. Case No.57 of 2024, for commission of alleged offences under Sections 354-D/ 376(2)(n)/ 376(3)/ 506 of IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court. 4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.483 of BNSS by the learned Additional Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Paralakhemundi, Gajapati, by order dated 10.02.2026 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed. 5. On 27.02.2024, the complainant reported that on 26.12.2023, accused Gabara Ritish lured his minor daughter (16) to B.N. Palace, Paralakhemundi, where he repeatedly raped her under a false promise of marriage. The accused threatened her to ensure silence and later circulated their joint photos and videos on social media. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 30.11.2025 and since in the meanwhile the victim has been examined as P.W.1, the Petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 7. Learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail and submits that taking into account the nature of allegations and the conduct of the Petitioner merely because of the period of incarceration, the Petitioner ought not to be released on bail. 8. Learned counsel for the State also opposes the prayer for bail, inter alia, on the ground that the P.W.1 (victim) has supported the allegations made against the accused and the same has been instituted under the rigors of cross-examination. Hence, no leniency ought to be shown. 9. Considering the rival submissions and taking into account the period in custody and that the Petitioner was taken into custody at the age of 19, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin so as to ensure his presence during the trial. 10. It is directed that the Petitioner shall not in any way try to intimidate or threaten the Informant or his family. 11. It shall be open for the prosecution/Informant to seek variance of this order, if there is any threat perception. 12. Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear on each date of the trial. 13. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 14. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Jina