Djedje Raymond @ Chijoke vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 3293 Ori

Orissa High Court

Djedje Raymond @ Chijoke vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party on 9 April, 2026

Author: G. Satapathy

Bench: G. Satapathy

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                 BLAPL No.163 of 2026
   (In the matter of application under Section 483 of the
   BNSS, 2023).

   Djedje Raymond @ Chijoke      ...                     Petitioner
   Okoye
                        -versus-
   State of Odisha                    ...          Opposite Party

   For Petitioner            :          Mr. R.S. Samal, proxy
                                 counsel appearing on behalf
                                 of Mr. S.K. Behera, Advocate

   For Opposite Party        :      Mr. R.B. Mishra, Addl. PP
                                     Mr. S.R. Pati, Advocate
                                                 (Informant)

             CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

DATE OF HEARING & DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09.04.2026 (ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.

1. This is the bail application U/S.483 of the BNSS

by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with

Daragha Bazar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2025 corresponding

to S.T. Case No.226 of 2025 pending in the Court of

learned District & Sessions Judge, Cuttack, being charge

sheeted for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 108/

319(2)/308(5)/318(4)/338/340(2)/78(2)/336(2)/336(3)

of BNS r/w. Sec. 67/67-A of the IT Act and

Sec.12(1)(d)/ 12(1)(a) of Passports Act,1967 and Sec.

22/23 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 on

the main allegation of abetting commission of suicide of

the deceased by blackmailing her to part with money for

the relationship developed with her and overstaying in

India as foreign National without valid visa and

document by forging Passport.

2. In the course of hearing, Mr. Ravi Sankar

Samal, learned proxy counsel appearing on behalf of Mr.

Sanjay Kumar Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that although there appears allegation against

the petitioner for blackmailing the deceased, but the

petitioner has neither blackmailed the deceased nor

received any money from her and the allegation leveled

against the petitioner are false and concocted and the

SIM seized in this case has not been recovered from the

petitioner, rather the same stands in the name of

different persons and thereby, the petitioner even

though a foreign National, is not having any link with

this case, but he having been detained in custody since

long, his bail application may kindly be considered

favourably.

2.1. On the other hand, Mr. R.B. Mishra, learned

Addl. PP by producing the suicidal note submits that not

only the deceased had committed suicide, but also the

reason for commission of such suicide was blackmailing

by the petitioner and the petitioner being a foreign

National was regularly blackmailing the victim through

mobile phone and such mobile phone having tracked and

recovered from the petitioner and the petitioner being

prima facie involved in this case, his bail application may

kindly be rejected. In addition to aforesaid submission,

Mr. Satya Ranjan Pati, learned counsel for the informant

submits that not only the petitioner had blackmailed and

abetted the commission of suicide of the deceased, but

also he is prima facie involved in this case and he is over

staying in the country without any valid documents and

thereby, the Police has submitted charge sheet with aid

of Sec. 22/23 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act,

2025 r/w. Sec.12(1)(d)/12(1A) of Passport Act, 1967

and, therefore, it would be really hazardous to release

the petitioner on bail, since there is no guarantee that

the petitioner would make himself available for trial in

this case once released on bail. Accordingly, Mr. Pati

prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner.

3. After having considered the rival submissions

upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against

the petitioner for blackmailing the deceased and as a

consequence of such blackmailing, the deceased has

allegedly committed suicide and the petitioner is

accordingly alleged for abetting for commission of

suicide of the deceased. Besides, the IO while submitting

preliminary charge sheet has stated therein that the

petitioner is overstaying in the country since

11.04.2020. Further, in the course of investigation, the

IO has also verified the travel documents of the

petitioner by obtaining necessary information from

Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO),

Hyderabad, which has furnished information by checking

the petitioner's Passport No.19AA13724 that the

petitioner had entered into the country vide tourist Visa

No.VK9705316 on 23.11.2019. Further, the

Investigating Officer has also obtained instruction from

the FRRO that the Visa No.VJ5038102 pertains to

another foreigner and the sticker Visa appears to be a

forged document and the petitioner seems to be

impersonating.

4. In the aforesaid facts and circumstance and

taking into account the nature and gravity of the

offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the

accusation sought to be brought against him and the

alleged seizure of mobile phone from the petitioner with

one SIM number as provided by the deceased in her

suicidal note and keeping in view the alleged over

staying of the petitioner in the country without any

proper and valid documents, this Court is not inclined to

grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner

stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed

of. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to

the learned Court in seisin over the matter.

(G. Satapathy) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 9th day of April, 2026/S.Sasmal

Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 10-Apr-2026 12:56:25