[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Dilip Putel vs The State Of Orissa .... Opposite ... on 23 April, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.1627 of 2026
Dilip Putel .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Malaya Ranjan Gadatya, Adv.
-versus-
The State of Orissa .... Opposite Party(s)
Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order No. ORDER
01. 23.04.2026
F.I.R. Dated Police Case No. and Sections
No. Station Courts' Name
0431 19.10.2025 Sadar G.R. Case No.1769 Sections 75(2), 76, 296,
of 2025 arising out 331(4) & 351(3) of the
of Balangir Sadar Bharatiya Nyaya
P.S. Case No.431 of Sanhita
2025 pending
before the Court of
learned S.D.J.M,
Balangir
1.
This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with G.R.
Case No.1769 of 2025 arising out of Balangir Sadar P.S.
Case No.431 of 2025 pending before the Court of
learned S.D.J.M, Balangir registered for the alleged
commission of offences under Sections 75(2), 76, 296,
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 27-Apr-2026 19:03:06
331(4) & 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, has
filed this application for his release on bail.
4. The brief fact of the case is that on 18.10.2025 at about
10.30 P.M. the Petitioner forcefully entered into the
house of the informant and forced her to keep physical
relationship with him. Since the informant resisted him
from doing so, he threated her to kill her husband and
son. Thereafter, the Petitioner fled from the house of the
informant. Soon after the said incident an F.I.R was
lodged in the local Police Station. Accordingly, upon
completion of investigation, the Petitioner was taken
into custody. The Petitioner has been languishing in
custody since 20.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the
Petitioner is no way connected to offences alleged
against him. The above noted F.I.R has been lodged
against him due to some previous enmity. He,
accordingly, prays for permitting the Petitioner to be
released on bail.
6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the
prayer for bail of the present Petitioner. He further
contends that the Petitioner has three criminal
antecedents. He also contends that such type of offences
is not tolerable in a law abiding society. He,
accordingly, prays for dismissal of this BLAPL.
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 27-Apr-2026 19:03:06
7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both
the parties, this Court without going into the merits of
the case, directs the court in seisin over the matter to
release the present Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid
case on some stringent terms and conditions with
further conditions that:
i. the Petitioner shall appear before the
concerned local Police Station on every
alternate Sunday between 10.00A.M. to
12.00P.M. till conclusion of the trial;
ii. the Petitioner shall appear before the learned
Court in seisin over the matter on each date of
posting of the case;
iii. the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in
any criminal activities in future;
iv. the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence
of the prosecution witnesses in any manner;
v. the Petitioner shall not threaten the
informant or her family members in any
manner;
8. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail
cancellation of the bail.
9. This BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Ayaskanta
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 27-Apr-2026 19:03:06
