[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Damayanti Bhoi And Others vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 21 April, 2026
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.2015 of 2026
Damayanti Bhoi and others .... Petitioners
Mr. N.K. Sahu, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. S.K. Das, ASC
Mr. P.K. Dash, Advocate (Informant)
ABLAPL No.4167 of 2026
Sitarani Hajra @ Hajara .... Petitioner
Mr. P.K. Sahoo, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. S.K. Das, ASC
Mr. P.K. Dash, Advocate (Informant)
And
ABLAPL No.4169 of 2026
Pabitra Majhi and another .... Petitioners
Mr. P.K. Sahoo, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha & another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P.K. Sahoo, ASC
Mr. P.K. Dash, Advocate (Informant)
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
21.04.2026
Order No.
02. 1. All the ABLAPLs are disposed of by the following
common order.
2. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and learned
ASC for the State.
3. Instant petitions under Section 482 BNSS are filed for
pre-arrest bail of the petitioners in connection with Bansada
P.S. Case No.0023 of 2026 corresponding to Special Case
No.06 of 2026 pending in the file of learned District &
Sessions-cum-Special Judge, Bhadrak on the grounds stated
therein.
4. Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1. Learned counsels for
the petitioners submit that the alleged incident took place not
within the public view and hence, no any offence under the SC
& ST (PoA) Act is made out. The further submission is that
there have been omnibus allegations in the FIR i.e. Annexure-1
against the petitioners. The further submission is that the co-
accused, namely, Mithun Naik involved in the alleged incident
along with others has been arrested and his bail application has
been rejected.
5. Mr. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioners in
ABLAPL No.2015 of 2026 submits that in absence of any
specific allegations attributed to the petitioners, all of them
should be granted pre-arrest bail as they apprehend arrest in the
hands of the local police in view of the FIR lodged.
6. Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the other petitioners in
ABLAPL Nos.4167 & 4169 of 2026 would submit that there is
general allegation against the accused persons and nothing
specific and therefore, they should also be released on bail with
conditions.
7. Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the informant, on the
other hand, seriously opposed to the release of the petitioners
for the mischief committed by them combinedly. It is submitted
that the deceased was subjected to humiliations publicly and as
a result, he committed suicide. The further submission is that
there was aspersion made to the caste of the deceased and his
family for which he consumed poison and committed suicide
and therefore, for the involvement of the petitioners responsible
for the alleged incident, they should not be granted bail as has
been demanded.
8. Learned ASC for the State submits that there has been
allegations of ill-treatment meted out to the deceased during
and in course of the alleged incident.
9. The case diary is produced along with the statements of
the witnesses recorded under Section 180 BNSS and all are
gone through. Admittedly, the death of the deceased is on
account of poisoning. A copy of the post-mortem report is also
made available. The reason behind the alleged incident is
revealed from the FIR. It has been alleged by the petitioners
that the family of the deceased was involved in selling liquor.
In course of hearing, it is submitted that some of the petitioners
are even SCs and STs and almost all the lady members who
belong to Maa Durga Mahila Mandal, Chardia. But from the
FIR and the materials on record, as it is made to understand,
apart from the co-accused having been arrested, petitioner No.6
in ABLAPL No.2015 of 2026 is responsible for having
committed excess though there is general allegation against
others as well. It is informed to the Court by the learned
counsel for the informant that the co-accused, namely, Mithun
Naik is still in custody upon rejection of the bail plea pending
before this Court for consideration in CRLMA awaiting orders.
Regard being to the above facts and submissions of the learned
counsels for the respective parties and the circumstances under
which the overt acts have been committed and primarily, it is
directed against the co-accused persons, namely, Mithun Naik
and Pabitra Barik in ABLAPL No.2015 of 2026, this Court, the
petitioners being the members of Maa Durga Mahila Mandal,
Chardia and are ladies, though not inclined and in favour of
considering their pre-arrest bail plea but is of the view that they
should instead be directed to surrender before the learned court
below for being released with conditions. In order words, this
Court is not inclined to direct any such release of petitioner
No.6 in ABLAPL No.2015 of 2026 for the reason that he is
equally placed with the co-accused, namely, Mithun Naik.
10. Accordingly, it is ordered.
11. In the result, the ABLAPLs stand disposed of with the
direction as aforesaid. It is further directed that except
petitioner No.6 in ABLAPL No.2015 of 2026, all other
petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court
below. In the event, the said petitioners surrender before the
court of learned District & Sessions-cum-Special Judge,
Bhadrak within a fortnight from today, they shall be released
on bail in connection with Bansada P.S. Case No.0023 of 2026
corresponding to Special Case No.06 of 2026 subject to them
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand)
each with one solvent surety for the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned court below, which shall be at liberty
to impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. As regards
petitioner No.6 in ABLAPL No.2015 of 2026 is concerned, his
bail plea is rejected, however, granting him the liberty to
surrender before the court concerned seeking regular bail.
12. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
Alok
