Disposed¶30

Sridhar Nahak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 May 2026BLAPL/3794/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

BLAPL bail granted; cyber fraud / NCRP complaint; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Sections 318, 336, 340, 61(2), 3(5); I.T. Act Sections 66(C), 66(D); Sarankul Police Station; Nyayadhikari-cum-J.M.F.C. Odagaon; G.R. Case No.82 of 2026; custody since 27.02.2026; stringent bail conditions; alternate Sunday police station reporting; sixteen criminal antecedents alleged by State; account misused without knowledge; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi; 06.05.2026.

What did the court decide?

Release of the Petitioner on bail in G.R. Case No.82 of 2026 on stringent terms and conditions (alternate-Sunday police station reporting till conclusion of trial; appearance on each posting date; no criminal activity; no tampering with evidence; no threatening of informant or family), with cancellation of bail upon violation of any condition.

Sridhar Nahak Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, in custody since 27.02.2026 in connection with G.R. Case No.82 of 2026 (Sections 318, 336, 340, 61(2) & 3(5) BNS read with Sections 66(C), 66(D) I.T. Act), should be released on bail.

¶15

Court's answer

Considering the submissions of both parties, and without going into the merits of the case, the Court directed the court in seisin over the matter to release the Petitioner on bail in G.R. Case No.82 of 2026 on stringent terms and conditions.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

Bail is subject to stringent conditions: appearance before the concerned local Police Station every alternate Sunday between 10.00 A.M. to 12.00 P.M. till conclusion of trial; appearance before the trial court on each date of posting; no indulgence in criminal activities; no tampering with prosecution witnesses' evidence; and no threatening of the informant or his family members.

¶24

Key takeaways

Violation of any of the imposed bail conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — cyber fraud case (Sections 318, 336, 340, 61(2) & 3(5), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Sections 66(C), 66(D), I.T. Act): The High Court of Orissa, without going into the merits, directed the court in seisin (Nyayadhikari-cum-J.M.F.C., Odagaon) to release the petitioner — in custody since 27.02.2026 in G.R. Case No.82 of 2026 arising out of Sarankul P.S. Case No.29 dated 21.02.2026 (FIR No.0029, Sarankul PS, lodged on an NCRP complaint of cyber fraud through bank accounts in Nayagarh District) — on stringent conditions: reporting at the local police station every alternate Sunday (10.00 A.M.–12.00 P.M.) till conclusion of trial, appearance on every posting date, abstention from criminal activity, non-tampering with prosecution evidence, and non-threatening of the informant or his family; violation of any condition to entail cancellation of bail. The State opposed bail, alleging sixteen criminal antecedents; the petitioner's counsel contended his account was misused without his knowledge.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.3794 of 2026

¶3

Sridhar Nahak

¶4

…. Petitioner(s) Mr. Smruti Ranjan Rout, Adv. -versus-

¶5

…. State of Odisha Opposite Party(s) Miss Gayatri Patra, ASC

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI

¶8

Order No.			ORDER
01.			06.05.2026
F.I.R. No.	Dated	Police Station	Case No. and Courts’ Name	Sections
0029	21.02.2026	Sarankul	G.R. Case No.82 of 2026 arising out of Sarankul P.S. Case No.29 dated 21.02.2026 pending before the Court of learned Nyayadhikari-cum- J.M.F.C,Odagaon	Sections 318, 336, 340, 61(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Section 66(C), 66(D) of the I.T. Act

¶9

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶10

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

¶11

3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with G.R. Case No.82 of 2026 arising out of Sarankul P.S. Case No.29 dated 21.02.2026 pending before the Court of learned Nyayadhikari-cum-J.M.F.C, Odagaon registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 318, 336, 340, 61(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-May-2026 19:18:55

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

Nyaya Sanhita read with Section 66(C), 66(D) of the I.T. Act, has filed this application for his release on bail.

¶16

4. The brief fact of the case is that due to involvement of bank accounts operating within Nayagarh District in cyber fraud a complaint was reported through NCRP. Thereafter, based on the said complaint an F.I.R was lodged in the local Police Station. Upon lodging of the F.I.R and completion of investigation, the Petitioner was taken into custody and has been languishing in custody since 27.02.2026.

¶17

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Petitioner is no way connected to the offences alleged against him. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He has never engaged himself in any cybercrime, rather, his account has been utilized for the cybercrime without his knowledge. The Petitioner has been entangled in this case only on suspicion. He, accordingly, prays for permitting the Petitioner to be released on bail.

¶18

6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the present Petitioner. She further submits that such type of offences is not tolerable in a law abiding society. She further contends that the present Petitioner has sixteen numbers of criminal

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-May-2026 19:18:55

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

antecedents. She, accordingly, prays for dismissal of this BLAPL.

¶23

7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the parties, this Court without going into the merits of the case, directs the court in seisin over the matter to release the present Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid case on some stringent terms and conditions with further conditions that:

¶24

i. the Petitioner shall appear before the concerned local Police Station on every alternate Sunday between 10.00A.M. to 12.00P.M. till conclusion of the trial;

¶25

ii. the Petitioner shall appear before the learned Court in seisin over the matter on each date of posting of the case;

¶26

iii. the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal activities in future;

¶27

iv. the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner;

¶28

v. the Petitioner shall not threaten the informant or his family members in any manner;

¶29

8. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail.

¶30

9. This BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶31

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)

¶32

Signature Not Verified Judge

¶33

Digitally SignedSigned by: AYASKANTA JENA Ayaskanta Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-May-2026 19:18:55

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Sridhar Nahak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sridhar Nahak 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

Niranjan Behera Vs State of Odisha

Ratikanta Rout Vs the Joint Director, Enforcement Directorate, Bhubaneswar Zonal Office

Balaram Behera @ Raj Behera Vs State of Odisha

Simanchala Behera Vs State of Odisha

Kapilas Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Ashwathama Nayak Vs State of Odisha