Disposed¶13

Kunal Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 May 2025BLAPL/2425/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail; false promise of marriage; consent and sexual autonomy; Sections 64, 318(2), 351(3), 115(2), 3(5) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita; Mohana P.S. Case No.198 of 2024; G.R. Case No.294 of 2024; S.T. Case No.04/2025, Addl. Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi; reliance on CRLMC No.4485 of 2024 (Manoj Kumar Munda); stringent bail conditions including plantation of 400 saplings; custody since 19.10.2024; Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J.; order dated 09.05.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail by the court in seisin (Addl. Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi, in S.T. Case No.04/2025) subject to the enumerated stringent conditions, including fortnightly police reporting, non-tampering, non-intimidation, and plantation of 400 local-variety saplings with departmental assistance; BLAPL disposed of. ¶13

Kunal Behera Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, in custody in S.T. Case No.04/2025 for offences under Sections 64, 318(2), 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) BNS, alleged to arise from a physical relationship kept on an assurance of marriage together with taking of money from the informant, should be released on bail. +1 more

¶3

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, the submissions of learned counsel for the Petitioner, and the view taken in Manoj Kumar Munda (supra), the Petitioner should be granted bail by the court in seisin over S.T. Case No.04/2025.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

In cases of alleged sexual offences arising from relationships developed on a purported promise of marriage, consent must be approached with care: the principle of sexual autonomy presumes voluntary choice unless impairment is demonstrable, allegations that consent was vitiated solely by a failed promise may not in every case constitute an offence, and courts must tread cautiously in drawing inferences at the pre-trial stage, each case turning on its own facts.

¶7

Key takeaways

Bail is directed on stringent conditions: fortnightly appearance at the concerned local police station on Mondays between 10.00 A.M. and 1.00 P.M. till conclusion of trial; no indulgence in criminal activities; no tampering with prosecution evidence; no threatening the victim or her family; and, after the onset of monsoon (June 2025 to August 2025), planting 400 saplings of local variety (mango, neem, tamarind etc.) in and around his village, with saplings supplied by the District Nursery/D.F.O., site identification assisted by the Revenue Authority, monitoring by the I.I.C. with the local Forest Officer, and an affidavit undertaking two-year maintenance of the plants; violation of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack — BLAPL No.2425 of 2025, order dated 09.05.2025, Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J. Bail granted to Kunal Behera, in custody since 19.10.2024 in S.T. Case No.04/2025 (Addl. Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi) arising out of G.R. Case No.294 of 2024 and Mohana P.S. FIR No.0198 dt. 17.10.2024, registered for offences under Sections 64, 318(2), 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alleging a physical relationship kept on an assurance of marriage and taking of money from the informant. The Court observed that consent vitiated solely by a failed promise of marriage may not in every case constitute an offence, stressing sexual autonomy and caution at the pre-trial stage, and granted bail keeping in view its earlier judgment in Manoj Kumar Munda –vrs. State of Odisha & Anr., CRLMC No.4485 of 2024 (dt. 14.02.2025). Conditions: fortnightly Monday reporting (10.00 A.M.–1.00 P.M.) at the local police station till conclusion of trial; no criminal activity; no tampering with evidence; no threats to the victim or her family; plantation of 400 local-variety saplings (mango, neem, tamarind etc.) between June–August 2025 on Government/community/private land, saplings supplied by District Nursery/D.F.O., site identified with Revenue Authority assistance, monitoring by the I.I.C. with the local Forest Officer, and affidavit undertaking two-year maintenance; violation entails cancellation of bail. BLAPL disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.2425 of 2025

¶3

Kunal Behera …. Petitioner(s)

¶4

Mr. Kedar Chandra Sarangi, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. State of Odisha Opposite Party(s) Mr. Pradipta Satapathy, ASC

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

¶8

Ord	er		ORDER
No.			09.05.2025
F.I.R. No.	Dated	Police Station	Case No. and Courts’ Name	Sections
0198	17.10.2024	Mohana	S.T. Case No.04/2025 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi arising out of G.R. Case No.294 of 2024 and further arising out of Mohana P.S. Case No.198 of 2024 of learned J.M.F.C, Mohana	Sections 64, 318(2), 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

¶9

¶10

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶11

2 . Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned

¶12

counsel for the State.

¶13

Signature Not Verified

¶14

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48

¶15

3 . The Petitioner being in custody in connection with S.T. Case No.04/2025 pending in the Court of learned Addl.

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi arising out of G.R. Case No.294 of 2024 and further arising out of Mohana P.S. Case No.198 of 2024 of learned J.M.F.C, Mohana registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections Sections 64, 318(2), 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, has filed this application for his release on bail. 4 . The brief fact of the case is that after giving assurance of marriage the Petitioner kept physical relationship with the victim/informant. Thereafter, at some point of time the Petitioner has also taken some money from the informant. After keeping physical relationship and taking money from the informant since the Petitioner denied to get married with the informant, the informant lodged an F.I.R. before the local Police Station. Accordingly, upon lodging of the F.I.R and completion of investigation the Petitioner was arrested and has been languishing in custody since 19.10.2024.

¶18

5 . Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is also no credible material on record to connect him to the alleged offenses. The Petitioner has been in custody since 19.10.2024. In light of these facts, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for releasing the Petitioner on bail, as continued detention is unjustified in the absence of substantial evidence.

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48

¶21

Page 2 of 6

¶22

6 . Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail application, contending that the Petitioner is an accused of serious and heinous offenses. It is submitted that the Petitioner established physical relationship with the victim under false assurances of marriage. Given the egregious nature of allegations and the potential for evidence tampering, learned counsel for the State strongly opposes grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶23

7 . This Court finds it necessary to observe that in cases pertaining to the allegations of sexual offences arising from relationships developed on the basis of a purported promise of marriage, the issue of consent must be approached with careful consideration. While the law recognizes that consent obtained through deception or coercion may not be valid, it is equally important to acknowledge the principle of sexual autonomy, which presumes that an individual is capable of making voluntary choices unless demonstrably impaired. Allegations that consent was vitiated solely on the ground of a failed promise may not, in every case, constitute an offence, particularly where the nature of the relationship suggests mutual engagement over a sustained period. Premature conclusions regarding lack of consent, in the absence of clear indicators of coercion or bad faith, may cause unfair prejudice. Each case must, therefore, turn on

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48

¶26

Page 3 of 6

¶27

its own facts, and courts must tread cautiously in drawing inferences at the pre-trial stage.

¶28

8 . This Court had an occasion to deal with a case of similar facts to this case i.e. in CRLMC No.4485 of 2024 ( Manoj Kumar Munda –vrs. State of Odisha & Anr.) wherein the Petitioner/ alleged accused had challenged the proceeding initiated against him for commission of the alleged offences under Sections 376(2)(a), 376(2)(i), 376(2)(n), 294, 506, and 34 of the I.P.C. This Court vide judgment dated 14.02.2025 taking into account the various judicial pronouncements of the Supreme Court had made an elaborate discussions on the concept of consent and the issue of sexual autonomy and allowed the CRLMC No.4485 of 2024 quashing the proceedings against the Petitioner. The ordering portion of the said judgment is extracted herein below:

¶29

“36. The legal system, by criminalizing sex under a “false promise of marriage,” upholds this performative construct, one that assumes that women engage in sexual relationships only as a prelude to matrimony, rather than as autonomous agents of their own desires.

¶30

37. In its pursuit of justice, the law must not become an instrument of moral policing. It must acknowledge that sexual agency is not a promise, nor is it a contract that mandates a predetermined outcome. To assume otherwise is to deny women the full measure of their autonomy, desire, and choice, reducing them to mere bearers of honour,

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48

¶33

Page 4 of 6

¶34

rather than as individuals possessing an intrinsic right to their own bodies and decisions.

¶35

39. It is in this light that the automatic criminalization of failed relationships under the guise of “false promise of marriage” must be scrutinized. The assumption that every physical relationship between a man and a woman carries the implicit condition of matrimony is not a principle of law but a vestige of control.”

¶36

9. Considering the facts and circumstances, and keeping in view the submissions of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, and the view taken in Manoj Kumar Munda (supra), this Court is of the view that the Petitioner should be granted bail by the court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case. This Court, accordingly, directs the court in seisin over the matter to release the Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid case on some stringent terms and conditions with further conditions that:-

¶37

i. the Petitioner shall before the appear

¶38

concerned local Police Station in every fortnight on Monday between 10.00A.M. to 1.00P.M. till conclusion of the trial;

¶39

ii. the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal activities in future;

¶40

iii. the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner;

¶41

iv. the Petitioner shall not threaten the victim or her family members in any manner;

¶42

v. the Petitioner after the onset of monsoon (between June, 2025 to August, 2025), shall plant 400 saplings of local variety like mango, neem, tamarind etc. in and around his village

¶43

Signature Not Verified

¶44

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48

¶45

Page 5 of 6

¶46

over the Government land/ community land/ private land, if it is in the possession of the Petitioner or his family members.

¶47

Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail.

¶48

10. The District Nursery/D.F.O shall extend the helping hand by supplying the saplings to the Petitioner and the Revenue Authority shall assist the Petitioner in identifying the location for plantation of the saplings. If the land is not available, the Petitioner to approach the Revenue Authority for identifying the land for plantation and the Revenue Authority shall do the needful.

¶49

11. The I.I.C. of the concerned Police Station in coordination with the local Forest Officer shall monitor; whether the Petitioner has planted the saplings or not.

¶50

12. It is further made clear that the Petitioner shall file an affidavit after plantation of the saplings before the local Police Station assuring that he will maintain those plants for two years. The said affidavit be also produced before the learned court below at the time of trial.

¶51

13. This BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶52

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶53

Judge

¶54

Signature Not Verified

¶55

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48

¶56

Ayaskanta

¶57

Page 6 of 6

Kunal Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunal Behera 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited,Khorda Vs Tara Mallik

Sanurjya Bhoi Vs State of Odisha

Tungi @ Dibas Naik Vs State of Odisha

Amit Kumar Vs State of Odisha

R. Rajaram Vs State of Odisha

Suresh Choudhury @ Taklu Vs State of Odisha