Dismissed¶26

Uttam Kumar Sharma v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC2 May 2026ABLAPL/2670/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected; Uttam Kumar Sharma v. State of Odisha; ABLAPL No.2670 of 2026; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra; order dated 02.05.2026; Bandamunda P.S. Case No.86 of 2026; G.R. Case No.338 of 2026; learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela; Sections 318(4)/340(2)/336(3)/61(2)/112(2) BNS 2023; Sections 3/4/5 Orissa Prevention of Gambling Act 1954; Sections 66(C)/66(D) I.T. Act 2000; online gambling; three criminal antecedents; parity with co-accused admitted to bail; acquittal in one antecedent case; liberty to surrender and seek regular bail; consideration on merits same day.

What did the court decide?

No anticipatory bail granted; petitioner given liberty to surrender before the trial Court and file a regular bail application (to be considered on merits in accordance with law on the same day). ¶26

Uttam Kumar Sharma Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No anticipatory bail granted; petitioner given liberty to surrender before the trial Court and file a regular bail application (to be considered on merits in accordance with law on the same day).

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory (pre-arrest) bail should be granted to the petitioner in connection with Bandamunda P.S. Case No.86 of 2026 / G.R. Case No.338 of 2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 318(4)/340(2)/336(3)/61(2)/112(2) of the BNS, 2023 and allied provisions. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

In view of the petitioner's criminal antecedents, the Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail and rejected the anticipatory bail application.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner remains at liberty to surrender before the trial Court and move a regular bail application raising all grounds, including parity; such application is to be considered by the Court below on merits in accordance with law on the same day.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Pre-arrest bail refused on account of criminal antecedents. Uttam Kumar Sharma sought anticipatory bail in ABLAPL No.2670 of 2026 before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra, order dated 02.05.2026) in Bandamunda P.S. Case No.86 of 2026, corresponding to G.R. Case No.338 of 2026, pending before the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela, for alleged offences under Sections 318(4)/340(2)/336(3)/61(2)/112(2) of the BNS, 2023, read with Sections 3/4/5 of the Orissa Prevention of Gambling Act, 1954 and Sections 66(C)/66(D) of the I.T. Act, 2000. The Additional Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner had three criminal antecedents; petitioner's counsel responded that he had been acquitted in one case and that all other co-accused were already admitted to bail, entitling him to parity. Weighing the criminal antecedents, the Court declined anticipatory bail and rejected the application, disposing of the ABLAPL while granting liberty to surrender before the trial Court and seek regular bail on all grounds including parity, to be considered on merits in accordance with law the same day. No precedent was cited or relied upon.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.2670 of 2026

¶3

Uttam Kumar Sharma …. Petitioner(s)

¶4

Mr. Pabitra Kumar Nayak, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Mr. Debaraj Mohanty, AGA

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

ORDER

Order No.

02.

1. Heard.

02.05.2026

2. The petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Bandamunda P.S. Case No.86 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.338 of 2026 registered for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 318(4)/340(2)/336(3)/61(2)/112(2) of the BNS, 2023, read with Sections 3/4/5 of Orissa Prevention of Gambling Act, 1954 r/w Section 66(C)/66(D) of the I.T. Act, 2000, pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela.

¶15

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that except the present bail application, no other bail application of the

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R.

¶18

4. At the outset, Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents.

¶19

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of three criminal antecedents, in one of the cases he has already been acquitted. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that except the present petitioner, all other co-accused persons have already been admitted to bail. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to parity.

¶20

6. Be that as it may, in view of the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. However, it is open for the petitioner to surrender before the trial Court and move regular bail application taking all the grounds including the ground of parity. If such regular bail application is moved by the petitioner before the Court below, the same shall be considered by the

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

Courts below on merits in accordance with law on the

¶23

dame day.

¶24

7. It is open for the petitioner to urge all the grounds in the regular bail application including the ground of parity.

¶25

8. With the aforementioned observation, the

¶26

ABLAPL is disposed of.

¶27

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶28

Subhasis

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 02-May-2026 16:07:20

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Uttam Kumar Sharma v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uttam Kumar Sharma 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

Lopita Mohanta Vs Principal, Mpc Autonomous College, Takhatpur, Baripada, Mayurbhanj

Debendra Naik Vs State of Odisha

Mataraj Naik @ Okila Naik Vs State of Odisha

Lanka Mallik @ Sumanta Malik Vs State of Odisha

Sabita Sethi Vs State of Odisha

Ajay Majhi Vs State of Odisha