Allowed

Ranjan Kumar Rana v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Jun 2026BLAPL/2043/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail appeal of an accused who had been denied bail by the Special Judge. The court noted the filing of the charge sheet and lack of prior pending applications, releasing the petitioner on conditions including monthly police station appearance and subject to verification of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to verification of criminal antecedents and monthly appearance before the police station till submission of final charge sheet.

Ranjan Kumar Rana Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 2043 of 2026

¶2

Ranjan Kumar Rana

¶3

Petitioner

¶4

Mr. G. Satpathy, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party Smt. S. Mohanty, ASC

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

09.06.2026

Order No.

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

¶13

05.

¶14

The Petitioner is accused in connection with C.T. Case No.129 of 2026, pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C., Basta, arising out of Baliapal P.S. Case No. 36 of 2026 , for commission of alleged offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), and 341(1) of BNS, 2023.

¶15

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.

¶16

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.483 of BNSS by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Balasore, by order dated 18.02.2026 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶17

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 24.01.2026 at about 10:30 A.M., the complainant

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

reported that one Ranjan Rana opened a branch/account associated with the State Bank of India and collected deposits exceeding ₹50 lakh from more than 41 persons belonging to the Scheduled Tribe community as well as other communities. He allegedly induced the depositors to invest money by assuring them that they would receive ₹2,000 per month for every deposit of ₹1,00,000. Relying upon such assurance, the depositors handed over cash to him for deposit in their bank accounts. However, Ranjan Rana allegedly dishonestly misappropriated the money and failed to deposit the collected amounts into the respective bank accounts of the depositors. When the depositors demanded the return of their money, he allegedly abused, threatened, and misbehaved with them, thereby cheating the depositors.

¶20

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 24.01.2026 and the preliminary charge sheet having been filed on 23.04.2026. Hence, further continuance of the Petitioner in custody is not warranted.

¶21

Such submission is opposed by the learned counsel for the Stat, inter alia, on the ground that the allegation is of defalcation of public money to the tune of 50 lakhs which was collected from the villagers and not deposited in the Bank.

¶22

It is stated at the Bar that the Petitioner has no criminal proclivity.

¶23

Considering the nature of allegation and the filing of the charge sheet, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

Court in seisin so as to ensure his presence during the trial subject to verification of criminal antecedent of the Petitioner of any nature.

¶26

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

¶27

Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Police Station once a month till the submission of “final charge sheet”. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the learned Court in seisin.

¶28

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶29

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

¶30

(V. NARASINGH) Vacation Judge

¶31

Jina

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: JINA DIGAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 10-Jun-2026 16:15:02

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Ranjan Kumar Rana v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjan Kumar Rana 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fakira M.Pradhan Vs Maheswar Ghadei

Gavar Ritesh @ Retesh Kumar @ G.R.Ritesh Kumar @ G.Ritish Kumar Vs State of Odisha

Amit @ Amitabha Naik Vs State of Odisha

Rajesh Nag Vs State of Odisha

Bira Kaibarta Vs State of Odisha

Nilamani Sahu Vs State of Odisha