Disposed¶20

Mohammad Mukim @ MD Mukim v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Feb 2026ABLAPL/856/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pre-arrest bail / anticipatory bail denied; Section 482 BNSS; Sadar P.S. Case No.464 of 2025; G.R. Case No.2049 of 2025; S.D.J.M. Sundargarh; pickup van of petitioner found and seized; attempted removal of electrical wire; surrender within a fortnight; regular bail to be duly considered; Sessions Court second-hour same-day fallback; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; ABLAPL No.856 of 2026; Justice R.K. Pattanaik; order dated 09.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail refused; petitioner directed to surrender before learned S.D.J.M., Sundargarh within a fortnight and move for regular bail, which shall be duly considered; if rejected, he may approach the learned Sessions Court during the second hour on the same day, with the case record made available for that purpose. ¶20

Mohammad Mukim @ MD Mukim Vs State of Odisha — Anticipatory Bail | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether pre-arrest bail under Section 482 BNSS should be granted to the petitioner in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.464 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2049 of 2025 pending before learned S.D.J.M., Sundargarh.

¶15

Court's answer

Considering the objection from the side of the State, the nature of the allegations, and that the petitioner's vehicle was found and seized in connection with the case, the Court declined to grant pre-arrest bail and directed the petitioner to surrender before the learned court below and seek regular bail.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Conditional directions: if the petitioner surrenders within a fortnight before learned S.D.J.M., Sundargarh and moves regular bail, it shall be duly considered; if rejected, he may approach the learned Sessions Court during the second hour for orders on the same day, for which purpose the case record shall be made available.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, ABLAPL No.856 of 2026 (order dated 09.02.2026, Mr. Justice R.K. Pattanaik): Petitioner Mohammad Mukim @ Md Mukim sought pre-arrest bail under Section 482 BNSS in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.464 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2049 of 2025 pending before learned S.D.J.M., Sundargarh, claiming non-involvement although his pickup van was found parked near the spot where, per the FIR, miscreants attempted to remove electrical wire. In view of the State's objection, the serious nature of the allegations, and the finding and seizure of the petitioner's vehicle in connection with the case, the Court declined pre-arrest bail and directed surrender before the learned court below and pursuit of regular bail. The Court further directed that if the petitioner surrendered within a fortnight and moved regular bail, it shall be duly considered; if rejected, he may approach the learned Sessions Court during the second hour on the same day, the case record to be made available. The ABLAPL was accordingly disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.856 of 2026

¶2

Mohammad Mukim @ Md …. Petitioner Mukim

¶3

Mr. S. Patel, Advocate

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

State of Odisha

¶6

…. Opposite Party

¶7

Mr. M.K. Mohanty, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

09.02.2026

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶15

Instant petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS by the petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.464 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2049 of 2025 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Sundargarh on the grounds stated.

¶16

Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1. It is claimed that the petitioner is not involved but apprehends arrest since his vehicle, a pickup van was found parked near the spot. Learned counsel for the State submits that the allegation is serious in nature since the miscreants attempted to remove electrical wire. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle, whereas, the driver, as per the FIR, managed to flee from the spot and considering the same, he should be allowed to go on bail but in view of the objection from the side of the

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

State and nature of allegations and since vehicle of the petitioner was found and seized in connection with the case, this Court is not inclined to grant him pre-arrest bail but directs him to surrender before the learned court below and to take such plea seeking regular bail.

¶19

4. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶20

In the result, the ABLAPL is disposed of with the direction as aforesaid. It is further directed that in the event, the petitioner surrenders within a fortnight from today before learned S.D.J.M., Sundargarh in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.464 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2049 of 2025 and moves regular bail, it shall be duly considered and in case rejected, he shall approach the learned Sessions Court during the second hour for an orders on the same day and for the said purpose, the case record shall be made available

¶21

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

¶22

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶23

TUDU

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: THAKURDAS TUDU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,CTC Date: 10-Feb-2026 13:26:07

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Mohammad Mukim @ MD Mukim v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Mukim @ MD Mukim 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

Abhimanyu Mohapatra Vs Nalini Kanta Pradhan

Dayanidhi Paltasingh Vs State of Odisha

Bipin B.Tripathy Vs State and Ors.

Suryakanta Jena @ Bulu Jena Vs State of Odisha

B. Dalashu @ Dilesu Patra Vs State of Odisha

Dillip Swain @ Dillip Kumar Swain Vs State of Odisha