IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.2037 of 2026 Kailash Chandra Dash@ Kailash Chandra Panda …. Petitioner Mr. J.Sahoo, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Ms. S.Mohanty,ASC And ABLAPL No.2144 of 2026 Radha Gobinda Barik & another …. Petitioners Mr. J.Sahoo, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Ms. S.Mohanty, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 16.04.2026 01. 1. Both the ABLAPLs are taken up together and disposed of by the following common order. 2. Recorded the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties. 3. Instant petitions have been filed under Section 482 BNSS by the petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.51 of 2026 pending in the file of learned JMFC, Begunia arising out of Begunia P.S. Case No.55 of 2026 on the grounds stated. 4. Perused the F.I.R. as at Annexure-1. The details of the allegations stand narrated therein by the informant, who happens of the wife of petitioner No.1 in ABLAPL No. 2144 of 2026. Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner in ABLAPL No. 2037 of 2026 is an outsider and he said to have committed mischief on the instigation of petitioner No.2, namely, mother in-law of the informant in ABLAPL No. 2144 of 2026. It is submitted that the informant is in a relationship with one Satyajit Samantray, hence, a proceeding under Section 13-A of the Hindu Marriage Act has been initiated by petitioner No.1 in ABLAPL No. 2144 of 2026 registered as C.P. No. 28 of 2026 pending in the file of the Family Court, Khurda. It is alleged that the allegations in the F.I.R. are false and therefore, the petitioners are entitled to go on bail pending investigation. 5. Recorded the objection of the State. 6. According to the informant in view of the F.I.R., the petitioner in ABLAPL No. 2037 of 2026 committed the overt acts described therein at the behest of her mother-in-law, namely, petitioner No.2 in ABLAPL No. 2144 of 2026 which is, however, alleged to be false as submitted by Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioners. The reason behind the dispute is described by Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel referring to the proceeding before the Family Court on account of the extra- marital relationship of the informant with the said Satyajit Samantray, hence, the proceeding for divorce. Recording the submissions as above and nature of dispute and since the alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment not exceeding seven years, this Court though not inclined to entertain the plea of pre-arrest bail as has been demanded but is of the view that before any such action to follow, there is a need for compliance of Section 35(3) BNSS in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vrs. State of Bihar & another AIR 2014 SC 2756. 7. Accordingly, it is ordered. 8. In the result, the ABLAPLs are disposed of with the direction as aforesaid. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Kabita