Susanta Behera @ Raju Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2025)

Susanta Behera @ Raju Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail in connection with T.R. Case No. 477 of 2025 (SDJM, Khurda) arising out of Khurda P.S. Case No. 378 of 2025. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre-arrest bail.

Ratio / Principle

On perusing the victim's 183 BNSS statement and the injury report of the injured, the Court is not persuaded that the allegations are motivated or fanciful as contended by the petitioners' counsel; the plea of false implication is rejected.

Key takeaways

In the event the petitioners surrender before the learned court in seisin and move an application for their release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit.ratio¶23
The order passed in the case at hand shall not in any way prejudice the petitioners in respect of the other cases in which they are cited as accused.obiter¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Justice V. Narasingh), order dated 10.12.2025 — Anticipatory bail refused. Five petitioners (Susanta Behera @ … Raju, Bijay Behera, Ajay Behera @ Nindua, Tushar Barik @ Tusar Barik, Swapneswar Behera) sought pre-arrest bail in T.R. Case No. 477 of 2025 pending before the learned SDJM, Khurda, arising out of Khurda P.S. Case No. 378 of 2025, for offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/331(4)/296 of the BNS read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act. Their plea of false implication owing to village rivalry failed: on perusing the victim's 183 BNSS statement and the injury report of the injured, the Court was not persuaded that the allegations were motivated or fanciful. The ABLAPL stood disposed of, with liberty reserved to the petitioners to surrender before the court in seisin and seek regular bail, to be considered on its own merit; the order was declared not to prejudice them in the allied cases (Khurda P.S. Case Nos. 374 and 377 of 2025, and counter FIR Khurda P.S. Case No. 373 of 2025, all dated 29.08.2025).

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

ABLAPL No. 11212 of 2025

1. Susanta Behera @ …. Raju

Petitioners

2. Bijay Behera

3. Ajay Behera @ Nindua

4. Tushar Barik @ Tusar Barik

5. Swapneswar Behera

Mr. A. Naik, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opposite Party Mr. C.R. Swain, AGA Mr. A.K. Mansingh, Adv. (Informant)

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH ORDER

10.12.2025 Order No.

03.

None appears for the Informant when the matter is called.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with T.R. Case No. 477 of 2025 pending on the file of learned SDJM, Khurda, arising out of Khurda P.S. Case No. 378 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/ 331(4)/ 296 of BNS read with Section 8 of POCSO Act

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that for the self-same occurrence the

Page 1 of 3

Petitioners have been cited as accused in two other cases i.e. Khurda P.S. Case No.374 of 2025 and Khurda P.S. Case No.377 of 2025 apart from the present case and the Petitioners’ counter FIR is Khurda P.S. Case No.373 of 2025 and all dated 29.08.2025.

It is submitted that it’s a case of false implication because of village rivalry. 6. Such submission is opposed by the learned counsel for the State referring to the 183 BNSS statement of the victim as well as the injuries suffered, which according to the learned counsel for the State corresponds to the allegations. 7. This Court perused the 183 BNSS statement of the victim and the injury report of the injured. 8. Considering the same, this Court is not persuaded to hold that the allegations are motivated or fanciful as being made out by the learned counsel for the Petitioners.

Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre-arrest bail. However, in the event the Petitioners surrender before the learned Court in seisin in the aforesaid case and move an application for their release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit.

It is needless to the state here that the order passed in the case at hand shall not in any way

Page 2 of 3

prejudice the Petitioners in respect of the cases in which they are cited as accused.

Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

Santoshi

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 12-Dec-2025 10:23:49

Page 3 of 3