Disposed¶18

Bhramara Kisan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC17 Dec 2025BLAPL/12537/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; BLAPL No.12537 of 2025; order dated 17.12.2025; Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra; petitioner Bhramara Kisan (adv. Akshaya Kumar Sahoo) v. State of Odisha (AGA A.K. Apat); bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. refused at this stage for accused in S.T. Case No.24 of 2021 arising from Deogarh P.S. Case No.162 of 2021 under Sections 450/354/302 IPC; earlier bail rejection dated 07.11.2025 by learned I/C Sessions Judge, Deogarh; 18 of 34 witnesses examined including P.W.18 (daughter of accused); doctor and material witnesses unexamined; liberty to renew bail plea after six months or after examination of material witnesses; BLAPL disposed of.

What did the court decide?

No bail granted; liberty to renew the bail plea after six months or after examination of the material witnesses. ¶18

Bhramara Kisan Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.12537 of 2025

¶3

Bhramara Kisan …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Akshaya Kumar Sahoo, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opp. Party

Mr. A.K. Apat, AGA

CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order No.

ORDER 17.12.2025

01.

1. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Deogarh P.S. Case No.162 of 2021 corresponding to S.T. Case No.24 of 2021 for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 450/354/302 of the IPC pending in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Deogarh. The petitioner had approached the learned I/C Sessions Judge, Deogarh in S.T. Case No.24 of 2021praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 07.11.2025 has rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying for enlargement on bail.

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

2. In the present case, out of 34 charge sheeted witnesses, 18 witnesses have been examined. The eye witnesses to the occurrence the daughter of the accused has been examined as P.W.18. She has directly implicated the present petitioner and stated that she is the witness to the petitioner assaulting her mother.

¶16

3. It appears from the record that the doctor, who has examined the deceased, has not yet been examined and the other material witnesses have also not been examined in the present case.

¶17

4. In view of the above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. But liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his bail plea after six months or after examination of the material witnesses in the present case.

¶18

5. With the aforementioned liberty, the BLAPL is disposed of.

¶19

Subhasis

¶20

Judge

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 17-Dec-2025 18:37:48

¶23

Page 2 of 2

Bhramara Kisan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhramara Kisan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narahari Das Vs State

Jagannath Nayak Vs State

Lakshyapati Kumar Vs State

Rupashree Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Ramesh Sandha Vs State of Odisha

Deepak Swain Vs State of Odisha