[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Simanchal Gouda vs State Of Odisha .... Opp. Party on 21 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.1824 of 2026
Simanchal Gouda .... Petitioner
Mr. Debasis Sarangi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party
Mr. Aurobinda Mohanty, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order ORDER
No. 21.04.2026
01.
1.
The petitioner is an accused in connection with
Seragada P.S. Case No.598 of 2024 corresponding to
S.T. Case No.45 of 2025 for the offences punishable
under Sections 296/64(2)(m)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023,
pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C.(Cog.),
Aska. The petitioner had approached the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Aska in S.T. No.45 of 2025
praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide
its order dated 22.01.2026 rejected the bail
application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the
petitioner has filed the present petition under 483 of
BNSS, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction
from the petitioner, submits that except the present
bail application, no other bail application of the
petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the
aforesaid F.I.R.
3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner had
proposed the victim and as because he was related,
the victim was not agreeable to his proposal for which,
the petitioner got enraged and threatened the victim to
do away with her life as well as her family members.
One day, when the victim had been to the village pond,
at that time, the petitioner forcibly cohabited with her
and thereafter, he also visited her house during the
absence of her parents and used to cohabit with her.
15 days prior to the lodging of the F.I.R., she informed
about the incident to her father and they kept quiet.
On 28.12.2024, the petitioner had been to the house
of the victim and abused her in filthy language and
threatened to do away with her life. Hence, the F.I.R.
4. In the trial, all the important witnesses have
already been examined including the prosecutrix and
the parents of the prosecutrix. Mr. Sarangi, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner, taking me to the
evidence of the prosecutrix, who has been examined as
P.W.4, pointed out paragraph-6, which reads thus:
"6. The accused has kept physical relationship
with me 4 to 5 times prior to 28.12.2024 in my
house when my parents were not there in my
house. I have never disclosed the said facts to
my parents prior to 15 days of lodging of FIR as
the accused has threatened to kill me and my
family members from life. My father has not
lodged any FIR against the accused on the day
when I have informed the matter to my father."
5. Mr. Sarangi, learned counsel further submits
that from the evidence of the prosecutrix, it can safely
be inferred that the petitioner has been in relationship
with the prosecutrix.
6. The petitioner has been in the jail custody since
31.12.2024. All the important witnesses have already
been examined including the prosecutrix and her
family members. There is no threat or apprehension
that the petitioner will influence any of the witnesses.
7. Learned counsel for the State, while opposing the
prayer for bail and submits that, even if this Court
inclines to admit the petitioner on bail, there should be
stringent conditions that he shall not threaten the
prosecutrix and her family members in any manner
whatsoever.
8. Regard being had to the period of custody of the
petitioner since 31.12.2024, the nature of the
allegation against the petitioner and the fact that all
the important witnesses have already been examined
in this case including the prosecutrix and the parents
of the prosecutrix, I am inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail.
9. Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on
bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in
the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it
would deem just and proper, subject to the following
additional conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the I.I.C. of
the concerned Police Station on every 15 days on a
sunday between 10.00 A.M. and 12.00 P.M. for at least
three months;
(ii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial
Court till the disposal of the trial;
(iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each
date on which the case is posted for trial without fail
till pronouncement of the judgment;
(iv) He shall not tamper with the evidence in any
manner whatsoever;
(v) He shall not commit any offence while on bail,
and he shall not influence any of the witnesses in any
manner whatsoever.
(vi) He shall be released on bail subject to
verification of similar type of antecedents.
In the event, the petitioner is found wanting for
violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this
Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the
prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate
application before the Court below for cancellation of
the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such
application is filed, the trial Court should decide the
application on its own merit.
10. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Subhasis
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 21-Apr-2026 19:32:58
