Hemant Soren v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC4 May 2026BLAPL/1796/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hemant Soren; BLAPL No. 1796 of 2026; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice V. Narasingh; order dated 04.05.2026; bail refused/disposed; C.T. Case No.84 of 2024; Jharpokharia P.S. Case No.20 of 2024; Sections 376(1)/302 IPC; S.483 BNSS; Sessions Judge Mayubhanj Baripada rejection dated 20.01.2026; CSW.18-Suru; P.W.9 informant; P.W.6; recovery of blood-stained weapon; liberty to renew bail prayer; T.P. Mohapatra; S. Panigrahi ASC.

What did the court decide?

Bail refused at this stage; liberty to renew the prayer before the learned trial Court after examination of CSW.18-Suru. ¶¶25

Hemant Soren Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 1796 of 2026

¶2

Hemant Soren

¶3

Petitioner

¶4

Mr. T.P. Mohapatra, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

¶10

ORDER 04.05.2026

¶11

Order No.

¶12

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

¶13

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with C.T. Case No.84 of 2024 pending on the file of learned 2^nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Mayubhanj, Baripada, arising out of Jharpokharia P.S. Case No.20 of 2024 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 376(1)/302 of IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court.

¶15

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.483 of the BNSS by the

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

learned Sessions Judge, Mayubhanj, Baripada by order dated 20.01.2026 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶18

The allegation against the Petitioner is that in the absence of informant, the Petitioner, who is his brother-in-law, came to his house and committed rape to his wife and thereafter, the Petitioner assaulted his wife by means of a wooden flank on her face and shoulder and she was died.

¶19

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that taking into account the evidence on record, there is no material to connect the Petitioner with the alleged offence. Hence, Petitioner may be released on bail and in this context reference is made to the evidence of P.W.9, the informant and P.W.6.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State opposes such prayer, referring to the statement of CSW.18-Suru, who is yet to be examined.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the State that the alleged weapon of the offence was recovered at the instance of present Petitioner and the same contains blood stains. Hence, the Petitioner ought not to be enlarged on bail at this stage.

¶22

Considering the rival submission, this Court is not inclined to entertain this bail application at this stage.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to renew his prayer before the learned Court in seisin after examination of CSW.18-Suru, which shall be considered on its own merits.

¶25

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶26

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

¶27

Santoshi

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 05-May-2026 19:58:48

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Hemant Soren v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemant Soren 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

Kirttan @ Kirtan Chandra Patra Vs State of Odisha

Trinath Jena Vs State of Odisha

Basu Das @ Basumati Paik Vs State of Odisha

Ajit Dash Vs State of Odisha

Mahabir Prasad Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Muna@Mrutyunjay Mishra Vs State of Odisha