Disposed¶19

Anita Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Anticipatory bail – Section 482 BNSS

Orissa HC22 Jun 2026ABLAPL/6965/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ABLAPL No.6965 of 2026; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; R.K. Pattanaik; 22.06.2026; anticipatory bail; pre-arrest bail; Section 482 BNSS; Pipili P.S. Case No.220 of 2026; G.R. Case No.307 of 2026; J.M.F.C. Pipili; petitioner not named in FIR; grievous injury; parity; son on regular bail; surrender; regular bail first hour; Sessions Court second hour; disposed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender before the learned J.M.F.C., Pipili within a fortnight and move for regular bail, to be considered and disposed of in the first hour; if rejected, she may approach the Sessions Court the same day in the second hour, considering her plea of parity. ¶19

Anita Mohanty Vs State of Odisha — Anticipatory Bail | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.6965 of 2026

¶3

Anita Mohanty …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. S. Pattanayak, Advocate

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party Mr. S. K. Brahma, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK ORDER

22.06.2026

Order No.

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶14

Instant petition under Section 482 BNSS is filed for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner in connection with Pipili P.S. Case No.220 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.307 of 2026 pending in the file of learned J.M.F.C., Pipili on the grounds stated therein.

¶15

Perused the FIRs as at Annexures-1 & 2. It is submitted that for the self-same incident, an FIR is lodged from the side of the petitioner as well. A copy of said FIR is at Annexure-2. It is submitted that the petitioner’s son is on regular bail. The further submission is that the allegation in the FIR is not genuine. It is fairly admitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the victim received one of the injuries stated to be grievous. But the claim is that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner about the assault by her nor named in the FIR. Recorded the objection of the State. The petitioner is stated to have no other antecedent. Considering the above facts and submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties,

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

though it is not a case for anticipatory bail, but the petitioner not named in the FIR, should be directed to surrender before the learned court below pleading parity and release on bail for its consideration and orders.

¶18

4. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶19

In the result, the ABLAPL is disposed of. It is directed that in the event, the petitioner surrenders before the learned J.M.F.C., Pipili in connection with Pipili P.S. Case No.220 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.307 of 2026 within a fortnight from today and moves an applications for regular bail, it shall be duly considered and disposed of in the first hour and in case of rejection, she shall approach the Sessions Court during the second hour for orders on the same day itself considering her plea of parity.

¶20

6. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶21

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶22

Sumitra

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 24-Jun-2026 13:43:13

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Anita Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anita Mohanty 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

Laxmidhar Panda Vs Kalinga Gramya Bank

N.I.a.Co.Ltd Vs Biswajit Singh

N.I.a.Co.Ltd Vs Bhuban Das

Moisin @ Mahasin Layak Vs State of Odisha

Krutibash Malik @ Pikunu Malik Vs State of Odisha

Kapil Muni Pandey @ Kapilmuni Pandey Vs State of Odisha