Rashmita Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC22 Apr 2026ABLAPL/2615/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory (pre-arrest) bail granted — ABLAPL No.2615 of 2026, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Justice S.S. Mishra, order dated 22.04.2026; BNS 2023 Sections 3(5), 75(2), 74, 115(2), 296; Balasore Town P.S. Case No.60 of 2026; C.T. Case No.200 of 2026; S.D.J.M. Balasore; petitioners are uncle and aunt of complainant; ancestral property dispute; cross case against complainant; release by Arresting Officer subject to criminal-antecedent verification; bail conditions incl. cooperation with I.O. and trial attendance; cancellation of bail on violation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to both petitioners; upon arrest, release by the Arresting Officer subject to verification of criminal antecedents of similar nature and compliance with the stated investigation and appearance conditions, failing which bail may be cancelled.

Rashmita Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory (pre-arrest) bail should be granted to the petitioners in connection with Balasore Town P.S. Case No.60 of 2026 (C.T. Case No.200 of 2026) for alleged offences under Sections 3(5)/75(2)/74/115(2)/296 of the BNS, 2023.

¶¶16-¶17

Court's answer

Having regard to the nature of the allegations against the petitioners, the Judge was inclined to grant them anticipatory bail.

¶¶26

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest, the petitioners are to be released by the Arresting Officer, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents of a similar nature.

¶¶28-¶29

Key takeaways

Release is further conditioned on cooperation with the investigation and appearance before the I.O. whenever their presence is required, refraining from similar offences while on bail, and appearance before the trial Court on each and every posting date unless prevented by sufficient cause.ratio¶¶29
Violation of any of the bail conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra), order dated 22.04.2026 in ABLAPL No.2615 of 2026: anticipatory bail granted to Rashmita Nayak and Bikash Ranjan Nayak — uncle and aunt of the complainant — in respect of Balasore Town P.S. Case No.60 of 2026 (C.T. Case No.200 of 2026), registered for offences punishable under Sections 3(5)/75(2)/74/115(2)/296 of the BNS, 2023 and pending before the S.D.J.M., Balasore. The FIR (incident of 18.02.2026 at B.C. Sen Road) alleges obstruction of the informant and his wife from entering their house, assault on and tearing of the wife's dress, chasing the informant with a stick, an attempt to assault the wife with a broom, and abuse and threats; a cross case has been registered by the petitioners against the complainant, the dispute being essentially over ancestral property. On arrest, the petitioners are to be released by the Arresting Officer subject to verification of criminal antecedents of a similar nature, and to conditions of cooperation with the investigation, appearance before the I.O. as required, abstention from similar offences while on bail and attendance before the trial Court on every posting date; violation of any condition entails cancellation of bail. The ABLAPL was disposed of accordingly.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.2615 of 2026

¶3

1. Rashmita Nayak

¶4

…. Petitioner(s)

¶5

2. Bikash Ranjan Nayak

¶6

Ms. Arpita Mohapatra, Advocate

¶7

-versus-

¶8

State of Odisha

¶9

…. Opposite Party(s)

¶10

Mr. Debaraj Mohanty, AGA

¶11

CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Order No. 22.04.2026

¶14

01.

¶15

1. Heard.

¶16

2. The petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in

¶17

connection with Balasore Town P.S. Case No.60 of

¶18

2026 corresponding to C.T. Case No.200 of 2026 registered for alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 3(5)/75(2)/74/115(2)/296 of the BNS, 2023, pending in the Court of the learned

¶19

S.D.J.M., Balasore.

¶20

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction

¶21

from the petitioners, submits that except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioners is pending in any other Court relating to the

¶22

aforesaid F.I.R.

¶23

Page 1 of 3

¶24

4. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners are uncle and aunt of the complainant. The informant alleged that on 18.02.2026, the accused persons prevented him and his wife from entering into their house situated at B.C. Sen Road. On protest, the petitioner no.1 allegedly assaulted the informant’s wife, tore her dress and chased the informant with a stick. It is further alleged that the petitioner no.1 attempted to assault the informant’s wife with a broom. The informant has also alleged that the petitioners abused him and his wife in filthy language and threatened them. Hence, the F.I.R.

¶25

5. The petitioners are uncle and aunt of the complainant. There is cross case registered against the complainant at the instance of the petitioners. The case is essentially arising out of the ancestral property dispute.

¶26

6. Regard being had to the nature of allegations against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is directed that, in the event, the petitioners are arrested,

¶27

Page 2 of 3

¶28

they shall be released by the Arresting Officer, subject to the verification of the criminal antecedents of similar

¶29

nature. The release of the petitioners shall also be subject to the conditions that they shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O. as and when their presence is required for the purpose of investigation; they shall not indulge in similar criminal offences while on bail; they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date of posting of the case, if not presented by sufficient cause. Violation of any of

¶30

the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶31

7. With this observation, the ABLAPL is disposed of.

¶32

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶33

Subhasis

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 24-Apr-2026 07:55:34

¶36

Page 3 of 3

Rashmita Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashmita Nayak 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

Abhishek Bag Vs State of Odisha

Bikram Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Chiranjivee Naik Vs State of Odisha

Sraban Bhoi Vs State of Odisha

Siddharth Sahoo @ Siddhartha Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Ajit Kumar Patel Vs State of Odisha