Archana Jena vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Parties
2025 Latest Caselaw 8176 Ori

Orissa High Court

Archana Jena vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Parties on 12 September, 2025

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                    ABLAPL No. 14346 of 2024

        1. Archana Jena                 ....          Petitioners
        2. Suraj Kumar Bisal
        3. Bhagaban Mohani
                                    Mr. S. Mohapatra, Advocate
                                -versus-

        1. State of Odisha              ....   Opposite Parties
        2. Dr.Laxmidhar Bhuyan
        3. Rajendra Sahoo
                                          Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC
                            Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate (Informant)

                     CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
                                  ORDER

12.09.2025 Order No.

05. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.

2. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.929 of 2024 pending on the file of learned JMFC(R) Cog, Berhampur, arising out of Gopalpur P.S. Case No.201 of 2024 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 419/420/506/507/120-B/34 of IPC.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that ex-facie the very registration of the FIR is untenable since this is an offshoot of a contractual obligation inter se between the parties.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the agreement which forms part of the FIR is in

itself a forged one and in respect of the same Petitioner has filed Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No.460 of 2024. And, to fortify his submission that the very registration of FIR is untenable, learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Radheyshyam & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2311.

5. Learned counsel for the State as well as Informant oppose the prayer for pre-arrest bail.

6. Learned counsel for the Informant submits that from the very inception the Petitioner had intention to dupe the Informant. Hence, the case law as cited has no application in the case at hand.

7. Taking into account the nature of allegation, and the background in which the same has been made, this Court directs that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper.

8. It is needless to state that the Petitioners shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.

9. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. U.C.C. as per rules.

                                                                         (V. NARASINGH)
Signed by: AYESHA ROUT                                                        Judge
Reason: Authentication

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 12-Sep-2025 19:48:32 Ayesha