Prasant Kumar Majhi @ Bapi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC23 Apr 2026ABLAPL/2873/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ABLAPL No. 2873 of 2026; Prasant Kumar Majhi @ Bapi v. State of Odisha; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice V. Narasingh; order dated 23.04.2026; anticipatory/pre-arrest bail; G.R. Case No. 119/2026; JMFC Chandbali; Chandbali P.S. Case No. 54/2026; BNS Sections 126(2), 296, 132, 221, 351(2); surrender within three weeks; release on bail by Court in seisin; cooperation with investigation; criminal antecedents raised by State (P.K. Ray, AGA); disposed.

What did the court decide?

Conditional pre-arrest bail direction: Petitioner to surrender within three weeks and move for bail, whereupon he shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper, and shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation. ¶¶19

Prasant Kumar Majhi @ Bapi Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 2873 of 2026

¶2

Prasant Kumar Majhi @ Bapi

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha

¶6

…. Opposite Party

¶7

Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH ORDER

¶9

23.04.2026

¶10

Order No.

¶11

01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶12

The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No. 119/2026 pending on the file of learned JMFC, Chandbali, arising out of Chandbali P.S. Case No. 54/2026, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/ 296/ 132/ 221/ 351(2) of BNS.

¶13

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Investigating Agency in an overjealous manner has instituted the FIR and it is submitted on instruction that the accused whose arrest was supposed to have been registered under the leadership of the present Petitioner was in fact taken into custody on the said date. Hence, in the light of this, the allegations are highly improbable.

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail referring to the materials on record and also to the effect that the Petitioner is stated to have antecedent.

¶16

So far as the criminal antecedent are concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that because the Petitioner is in public life he is being arrayed as an accused. Hence, that ought not to weigh with this Court in considering the present application.

¶17

Taking into account the rival submissions and the nature of allegations, it is directed that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioner shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper.

¶18