Kirttan @ Kirtan Chandra Patra Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Kirttan @ Kirtan Chandra Patra Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conditional pre-arrest bail: upon surrender within three weeks and moving for bail, the Petitioner to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper, subject to conditions (no departure from Odisha without permission, cooperation with investigation, no threatening or intimidating the informant and his family; variance open to prosecution/informant on threat perception).

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No. 4078 of 2025 (arising out of Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No.399 of 2025).

Court's answer

Considering the allegations in the FIR, the case diary materials and the Petitioner's age (70 years), the Court directed that on surrendering within three weeks 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.

Ratio / Principle

The Petitioner shall not leave the state of Odisha without specific permission from the learned Court in seisin and shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation (sentence continues over the page break at lines ¶18/¶20).

Key takeaways

The Petitioner shall not in any way try to threaten or intimidate the informant and his family.ratio¶21
It is open to the prosecution as well as the informant to seek variation of the order if there is any threat perception.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — ABLAPL No. 3338 of 2026 decided on 02.05.2026 by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (V. Narasingh, J.). Petitioner, aged 70 years, accused in G.R. Case No. 4078 of 2025 (2-SDJM, Balasore) arising out of Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No.399 of 2025 for offences under Sections 115(2)/ 127(2)/ 137(2)/ 308(5)/ 3(5) BNS and Sections 25 and 27, Arms Act, 1959. Counsel argued the accusation was an offshoot of an agreement dated 25.06.2013 between the Petitioner's daughter and the informant, backed by a money receipt, and noted a pending civil suit for cancellation of sale deed; the State cited case diary recitals of the informant and her husband going missing (MMR Nos. 55 & 56 dated 06.11.2025), injuries on the husband, and ongoing investigation. Considering the FIR allegations, the case diary materials and the Petitioner's age, the Court disposed of the ABLAPL directing release on bail upon surrender within three weeks and moving for bail, with conditions: no exit from Odisha without permission of the Court in seisin, cooperation with investigation, no threatening or intimidating the informant and his family; prosecution/informant free to seek variance on any threat perception.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 3338 of 2026

Kirttan @ Kirtan Chandra Patra

Petitioner

Mr. S. Dasmohapatra, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha …. Opposite Party

Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH ORDER 02.05.2026

Order No.

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

The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No. 4078 of 2025 pending on the file of learned 2-SDJM Court, Balasore, arising out of Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No.399 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 115(2)/ 127(2)/ 137(2)/ 308(5)/ 3(5) of the BNS, and U/s- 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the present accusation is offshoot of an agreement, which was executed between the daughter of the Petitioner and the informant and instead of honouring the terms of the agreement, which is stated to have been executed on 25.06.2013, false allegations have been made. He

Page 1 of 3

also relies on the money receipt evidencing such transaction. And, submits that the Petitioner may be released on pre-arrest bail.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner draws the attention of this Court to a civil suit instituted by the complainant for cancellation of sale deed. 5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail, referring to the recitals in the case diary that the informant and her husband were missing from their residence and in this connection Sahadevkhunta PS MMR Nos.55 and 56 dated 06.11.2025 were registered and later on appearing in the police station the allegations as borne out in the FIR were made.

He also refers to the injuries on the husband of the informant which corresponds to the allegation and it is further submitted that the investigation in the case at hand is continuing.

Considering the allegations in the FIR in question, in the backdrop of materials as noted and taking into account the age of the Petitioner (70 years), 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.

Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall not leave the state of Odisha without specific

Page 2 of 3

permission from the learned Court in seisin and shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.

It is further directed that the Petitioner shall not in any way try to threaten or intimidate the informant and his family.

It shall be open for the prosecution as well as the informant to seek variance of this order, if there is any threat perception.

The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

UCC as per rules.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

Santoshi

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 04-May-2026 20:08:35

Page 3 of 3