Manoj Kumar Mandal Vs State of Odisha

This is an application U/S.482 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with C.T. Case No.347 of 2026 arising out of Bhograi P.S. Case No. 139 of 2026 pending in the file of learned GN-cum-JMFC, Bhograi, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 85/296/115(2)/76/351(2)/3(5) of BNS r/w. Sec. 4 of DP Act.

¶13

In the course of hearing, Mr. Adhiraj Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was some trivial dispute between the petitioner and his wife and that too, on account of throwing of mobile phone of the victim to the pond, which is the normal wear and tear of a married life and, therefore, the petitioner having married to the victim around six years back and they being blessed with a child, the petitioner may kindly be granted pre-arrest bail.

¶14

3.1. In opposing the prayer for pre-arrest bail to the petitioner tooth and nail, Mr. Asit Kumar Jena, learned counsel for the informant submits that not only the petitioner was instrumental in subjecting the victim to torture and

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

cruelty, but he had maintained extra marital relationship with another lady and was never taking care of the victim and her son and in the process, he had also demanded a cash of Rs.5Lakhs as dowry from the victim and the brother of the victim had obliged such demand, but the conduct of the petitioner remains as it is and he continuously tortured the victim by keeping relationship with his paramour and, therefore, the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner may kindly be rejected.

¶17

3.2. In echoing the submission of Mr. Jena, Mr. S.J. Mohanty, learned Addl. PP, however, strongly opposes the pre-arrest bail of the petitioner by placing the statement of the victim and another independent witness and he accordingly, prays to reject the pre-arrest bail of the petitioner.

¶18

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears omnibus allegation against the petitioner, but there are some allegations against the petitioner for keeping extra-marital relationship with another lady and subjecting the victim to torture and cruelty, however, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner for assaulting the victim. All the offences alleged against the petitioner are triable by Magistrate, but do not prescribe punishment beyond seven years. In the aforesaid facts and situation and taking into account the progress in the investigation and there being no custodial interrogation required in the circumstance and keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another; (2014) 8 SCC 273 , this Court without expressing any view on merits, considers it in the interest of

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

justice to extend the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Hence, the ABLAPL stands allowed. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail by the Arresting Officer on such terms and conditions as deems fit and proper by him including the following conditions:

¶22

(i) the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required,

¶23

(ii) the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer and

¶24

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the country without previous permission of the Court.

¶25

Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference.

¶26

(G. Satapathy) Vacation Judge

¶27

S.Sasmal

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-Jun-2026 22:51:02

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Manoj Kumar Mandal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Mandal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Biranchi Kumar Nayak @ B.K.Nayak Vs Republic of India (Cbi)

Arjun Nayak Vs State of Odisha (Cbi)

Nimain Charan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha (Cbi)

Sulochana Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Isak Naik Vs State of Odisha

Sk. Amir Vs State of Odisha