Disposed¶20

Firoz Hussain Khan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Feb 2026ABLAPL/432/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pre-arrest bail refused; Section 482 BNSS application disposed with a surrender-and-regular-bail directive. Keywords: anticipatory bail denied, ABLAPL, pre-arrest bail, DI pipes theft, stockyard, Boudh P.S. Case No.489 of 2025, C.T. Case No.551 of 2025, S.D.J.M. Boudh, regular bail parity, confessional statement of co-accused, unknown miscreants, Rs.39 lakh, High Court of Orissa, R.K. Pattanaik.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail not granted; ABLAPL disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to surrender before learned S.D.J.M., Boudh within a fortnight and plead for regular bail claiming parity, which shall be considered with the claim of parity. ¶20

Firoz Hussain Khan Vs State of Odisha — Anticipatory Bail | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No. 432 of 2026

¶3

Firoz Hussain Khan …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. B.K. Ragada, Advocate

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

State of Orissa …. Opposite Party

¶7

Mr. M.K. Mohanty, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

18.02.2026

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶15

Instant petition under Section 482 BNSS is filed seeking pre-arrest bail of the petitioner in connection with C.T. Case No.551 of 2025 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M, Boudh arising out of Boudh P.S. Case No.489 of 2025 on the grounds stated.

¶16

Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1 and it reveals that theft of large quantity of DI pipes removed from a stockyard reported by the informant as per Annexure-1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not involved as no one has been named in the FIR. On the reading of the report, the Court finds that it has been lodged alleging therein removal of the pipes by unknown miscreants. It is claimed that the petitioner is likely to be entangled on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused. Learned counsel for

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

the State opposed any such plea for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner. Considering the nature of mischief alleged in the FIR i.e. Annexure-1 and removal of huge numbers of DI pipes of approximate value of Rs.39 lac and some odd, this Court is not inclined to consider any such request for anticipatory bail but is of the view that the petitioner should be directed to surrender before the learned court below seeking regular bail pleading parity.

¶19

4. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶20

In the result, the ABLAPL is disposed of with the direction as aforesaid. In the event, the petitioner surrenders before the court of learned S.D.J.M, Boudh within a fortnight from today in connection with C.T. Case No.551 of 2025 corresponding to Boudh P.S. Case No.489 of 2025 and pleads for regular bail, it shall be considered with the claim of parity.

¶21

6. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.

¶22

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶23

Rojina

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJINA SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CTC Date: 19-Feb-2026 18:41:18

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Firoz Hussain Khan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firoz Hussain Khan 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

Chiku Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Sanyasi Giri Vs State of Odisha

Tahar Khan Vs State of Odisha

Minaketan Swain Vs State of Odisha

Surendra Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha (Vigilance)

Sk. Ajij Vs State of Odisha