Partly allowed

Satya Narayan Dandasena v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Sept 2026ABLAPL/8919/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application filed apprehending arrest, the High Court refused to grant bail at that stage. Instead, the Court directed the petitioner to surrender within three weeks to seek bail before the court in seisin, subject to verification of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to surrender within three weeks to move for bail before the court in seisin; the impugned bail application is disposed of.

Satya Narayan Dandasena Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 8919 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010563702026

¶2

Satya Narayan …. Dandasena

¶3

Petitioner

¶4

Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. U.C. Jena, ASC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH ORDER

¶10

09.09.2026

¶11

Order No.

¶12

02. 1. At the outset, it is apt to note that the present ABLAPL was filed apprehending arrest on institution of an FIR.

¶13

During the pendency of the matter, the Petitioner is cited as an accused in Jharigaon P.S. Case No.164 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.157 of 2026 for commission of offence under Sections 420/468/471 of IPC. The FIR as well as the consolidated cause title indicating the case details is taken on record.

¶14

The description of Opposite Party No.2 shall not be reflected in the order passed by this Court.

¶15

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

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.157 of 2026, pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C., Jharigaon arising out Jharigaon P.S. Case No.164 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under Section 420/468/471 of IPC.

¶18

The allegations against the present Petitioner is of obtaining job as Computer Programmer on the basis of documents which is stated to have fabricated. 7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that since the allegations are all based on documentary evidence, custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is not necessary.

¶19

It is his further submitted that in the meanwhile the Petitioner has been disengaged. 9. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail. 10. Taking into account the nature of allegations, 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 subject to verification criminal antecedent of similar nature.

¶20

If it comes to the fore that the Petitioner has any such criminal antecedent, this order shall not be given effect to.

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

It is needless to state that the Petitioner shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation.

¶23

Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of. U.C.C. as per rules.

¶24

(V. NARASINGH)

¶25

Judge

¶26

Ayesha

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Sep-2026 18:42:03

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Satya Narayan Dandasena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Narayan Dandasena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases