Smith Dutta Acharya Vs State of Odisha — Dowry and Cruelty | Orissa HC (2025)

Smith Dutta Acharya Vs State of Odisha — Dowry and Cruelty | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail not enlarged at this stage; petitioner granted liberty to renew his bail plea after expiry of three months, or earlier if the victim is examined, before the Court below; trial Court directed to examine the victim/informant preferably within three months.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who had earlier withdrawn BLAPL No.6164 of 2025 on 08.07.2025 reserving liberty to seek bail after the victim's examination, is entitled to be enlarged on bail on his renewed application when the victim is not appearing for examination despite summons. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the earlier order of this Court dated 08.07.2025 (by which the petitioner had withdrawn BLAPL No.6164 of 2025 reserving liberty to renew after the victim's examination), the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

Ratio / Principle

The learned trial Court was directed to see that the victim/informant is examined as early as possible, preferably within three months; if the victim is not examined within three months, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his bail plea after expiry of three months.

Key takeaways

If the victim is examined before the expiry of three months, the petitioner may renew his bail plea before the Court below after her examination.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail - BLAPL No.13067 of 2025 under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 by accused in Puri Sadar P.S. Case No.193 of 2015 / G.R. Case No.247 of 2025 (Sections 85/64(2)(m)/351(2)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act and 66E of the I.T. Act), pending before the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, (FTSC), Puri, whose order dated 24.10.2025 rejected bail. Petitioner had earlier withdrawn BLAPL No.6164 of 2025 on 08.07.2025 reserving liberty to renew after the victim's examination; the victim, despite summons, was not appearing for examination (proceedings dated 19.11.2025 onwards). Held: in view of the earlier order dated 08.07.2025, the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage; the learned trial Court was directed to examine the victim/informant as early as possible, preferably within three months; failing which, and in any event upon earlier examination of the victim, the petitioner was at liberty to renew his bail plea before the Court below. BLAPL disposed of. (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Sibo Sankar Mishra, J.; order dated 18.12.2025)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

BLAPL No.13067 of 2025

Smith Dutta Acharya

…. Petitioner(s)

Mr. Pravat Ranjan Barik, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opposite Party(s)

Mr. Ashok Kumar Apat, AGA

CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

ORDER

Order No.

01.

1. Heard.

18.12.2025

2. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Puri Sadar

P.S. Case No.193 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. Case No.247 of

2025 registered on the allegation of the commission of the offence under Sections 85/64(2)(m)/351(2)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act and 66E of the I.T. Act, pending in

the Court of the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, (FTSC), Puri.

3. The petitioner had approached the learned court below

praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 24.10.2025 has rejected the bail application of the petitioner.

Page 1 of 3

Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 B.N.S.S, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail.

4. 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.

5. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court seeking grant of bail by filing BLAPL No.6164 of 2025. However, on 08.07.2025, the petitioner withdrew the bail application reserving his right to approach the learned trial Court for grant of bail after the examination of the victim.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite repeated summons, the victim is not appearing before the learned trial Court for the purpose of examination. He has taken me to the proceedings dated 19.11.2025 and subsequent proceedings, which indicates that despite the summons issued to the victim/informant, she is not appearing before the Court for examination. Therefore, the petitioner has repeated the bail plea before this Court.

7. In view of the earlier order of this Court dated 08.07.2025, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. However, the learned trial Court is directed to do well to see that the

Page 2 of 3

victim/informant is examined as early as possible preferably within

a period of three months. In the event, the victim is not examined within three months, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his bail

plea after expiry of three months. If the victim is examined prior to three months, after examination of the victim, the petitioner may renew his bail plea before the Court below.

8. With this observation, the BLAPL is disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

Swarna

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-Dec-2025 11:49:19

Page 3 of 3