Disposed

Manoranjan Jena v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Orissa HC9 Sept 2026ABLAPL/9385/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Odisha addressed a petition for pre-arrest bail in a Vigilance G.R. Case. Instead of deciding the bail merit, the court directed the petitioner to join investigation within three weeks, after which bail would be granted on surrender.

What did the court decide?

Directed Petitioner to surrender within three weeks to obtain bail; granted liberty to Vigilance to vary order if cooperation is not extended.

Manoranjan Jena Vs State of Odisha(Vig.) — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.9385 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010591072026

¶3

Manoranjan Jena

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr.S. Mohanty, Petitioner

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha (Vigilance)

¶8

…. Opposite Party

¶9

Mr.M.S. Rizvi, Counsel for the Vigilance

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

Order No. ORDER

09.09.2026

02.

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

¶15

The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Vigilance G.R. Case No.03 of 2026 pending on the file of learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Keonjhar arising out of Katak Vigilance Cell P.S. Case No.07 of 2026 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 13(2) read with section 13(1)(a) of P.C. Act and sections 406/409/120-B of the IPC.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that since the Petitioner has joined the investigation and taking into account the nature of allegations, his custodial interrogation is not warranted. Hence, he may be protected by pre-arrest bail.

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

Learned Counsel for the Vigilance, while not opposing such submission of the Petitioner joining the investigation, he ought not to be protected by pre-arrest bail.

¶19

Considering the rival submissions, 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.

¶20

It is needless to state that the Petitioner shall cooperate with the on going investigation. Liberty is granted to the Vigilance Department to seek variance of the order in the event the Petitioner does not extend the desire cooperation.

¶21

The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶22

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶23

(V. Narasingh) Judge

¶24

Basu

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV NAYAK Designation: ADDL. DY. REGISTRAR-CUM-ADDL. PRINCIPAL SECY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 12-Sep-2026 16:57:20

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Manoranjan Jena v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoranjan Jena v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

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