Pabitra Ray Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Pabitra Ray Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conditional pre-arrest bail secured: on surrender within three weeks and moving for bail, the Petitioners are to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper, subject to verification of any other criminal antecedents, verification of any challenge to this order before the Apex Court, and cooperation with the ongoing investigation.

Issue for consideration

Whether pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail should be granted to the Petitioners in connection with G.R. Case No.137 of 2025 arising out of Nimapara P.S. Case No.36 of 2025. +1 more

Court's answer

Taking into account the nature of allegations and the statement of the injured, the Court directed that on surrendering within three weeks and moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper, subject to verification of any other criminal antecedent than the one noted.

Ratio / Principle

If it comes to the fore that the Petitioners have any other criminal antecedent than the one referred to, the order shall not be given effect to.

Key takeaways

Before releasing, the learned Court shall verify whether this order has been assailed before the Apex Court and, if so, the result thereof.ratio¶¶24
The Petitioners shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.ratio¶¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — ABLAPL No. 2067 of 2025 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Justice V. Narasingh, 29.04.2025): Pabitra Ray, Nabakishore Ray and Premananda Ray sought pre-arrest bail in G.R. Case No.137 of 2025, pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara, arising out of Nimapara P.S. Case No.36 of 2025 for alleged offences under Sections 126(2)/296/118(2)/109/351(2)/3(5) of B.N.S., 2023. The State and the Informant opposed, citing the grievous injury to injured Papu Ranjan Chatoi and the criminal antecedents of Petitioners 1 & 3 (cited as accused in Nimapara P.S. Case No.305 of 2022 under Section 341/294/506/34 of IPC). Taking into account the nature of allegations and the statement of the injured, the Court disposed of the application by directing that, on surrender within three weeks and moving for bail, the Petitioners be released on bail by the Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper — subject to verification of any other criminal antecedents (if found, the order shall not operate) and of any challenge to the order before the Apex Court — and directing cooperation with the ongoing investigation.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

ABLAPL No. 2067 of 2025

1. Pabitra Ray

Petitioners

2. Nabakishore Ray

3. Premananda Ray

Mr. B.K. Nayak, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opposite Party

Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC Mr. J. Behera, Advocate (Informant)

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

Order No.

29.04.2025

02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.

The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.137 of 2025, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara, arising out of Nimapara P.S. Case No.36 of 2025 for commission of alleged offences under Sections 126(2)/296/118(2)/109/351(2)/3(5) of B.N.S., 2023. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that omnibus allegations have been made and even if the entire allegations in the FIR are accepted at its face value, the role attributed to the present Petitioners is one of instigation and the overt act is attributed to Minaketan.

Page 1 of 3

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that because of the counter case, exaggerated allegations have been made.

Such submission is refuted by the learned counsel for the State as well as Informant. 6. Learned counsel for the State referring to the injury report of one of the injured Papu Ranjan Chatoi submits that the injury is grievous. Hence, the Petitioners ought not to be released on anticipatory bail. And, it is submitted that the Petitioners are equally responsible for the offence as committed.

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the State that the Petitioners 1 & 3 have criminal antecedents in as much as they have been cited as accused in Nimapara P.S. Case No.305 of 2022 under Section 341/294/506/34 of IPC. 8. Taking into account the nature of allegations and the statement of the injured, this Court directs that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper subject to verification of any other criminal antecedent than the one noted above.

If it comes to the fore that the Petitioners have any other criminal antecedent than the one referred to hereinabove, this order shall not be given effect to.

Page 2 of 3

Before releasing the learned Court shall verify as to whether order of this Court has been assailed before the Apex Court and if so, the result thereof.

It is needless to state that the Petitioners shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.

Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of.

U.C.C. as per rules.

(V. NARASINGH)

Judge

Ayesha

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 01-May-2025 10:58:35

Page 3 of 3