Allowed¶5

Rakshi Meher v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Orissa HC9 Jul 2026BLAPL/5095/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

BLAPL No.5095 of 2026; bail application; Section 483 BNSS; first proviso Section 480 BNSS lady accused; Section 7 PC Act; vigilance; Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.05 of 2026; V.G.R Case No.02 of 2026; Special Judge (Vigilance) Bargarh; illegal gratification Rs.30,000/-; loan file subsidy; bail bond Rs.25,000/- one solvent surety; Section 269 BNS 2023; government servant; custody since 06.05.2026; charge-sheet submitted; no custodial interrogation required; presumed innocent until proven guilty; Justice G. Satapathy; oral order 09.07.2026; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount, subject to the condition that the petitioner cooperate with the trial (default punishable under S.269 BNS 2023); BLAPL disposed of.

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 06.05.2026 in connection with Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.05 of 2026 (offence under S.7 PC Act), should be admitted to bail under S.483 BNSS. +1 more

¶2

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioner vis-a-vis the accusations sought to be brought, the petitioner's pre-trial detention in custody since 06.05.2026 with the charge-sheet submitted in the meantime, the absence of any requirement of custodial interrogation, the petitioner's status as a government servant, the petitioner's entitlement as a lady to the benefit of the first proviso appended to Sec. 480 of BNSS, and the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, this Court, without expressing any view on merits, admitted the petitioner to bail.

¶4

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case, on such terms and conditions as that Court deems fit and proper.

¶5

Key takeaways

A condition was imposed that the petitioner shall cooperate with the trial; in case the petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the petitioner for offence under S.269 of BNS, 2023 in accordance with law.ratio¶5(i)

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under S.483 BNSS granted - The High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Justice G. Satapathy, oral order 09.07.2026) admitted petitioner Rakshi Meher, a lady government servant in custody since 06.05.2026 with charge-sheet already submitted in Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.05 of 2026 (corresponding V.G.R Case No.02 of 2026 pending before the Special Judge (Vigilance), Bargarh) for an offence under S.7 PC Act alleging demand and acceptance of Rs.30,000/- gratification for processing a loan file for grant of subsidy, to bail without expressing any view on merits. Grounds included absence of need for custodial interrogation and the petitioner's entitlement as a lady to the first proviso to Sec. 480 BNSS. Bail was fixed at a Rs.25,000/- bond with one solvent surety for the like amount, conditioned on cooperation with the trial, failure to appear without sufficient cause exposing the petitioner to proceedings under S.269 BNS 2023.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.5095 of 2026

¶2

Rakshi Meher

¶3

… Petitioner

¶4

Mr. S.K. Jena, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha (Vigilance) … Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Das, Addl. PP(Vig) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL)09.07.2026

¶7

Order No.

¶8

01.

¶9

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

¶10

This is an application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.05 of 2026 corresponding to V.G.R Case No.02 of 2026 pending in the file of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Bargarh, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 7 of PC Act, on the main allegation of demanding and accepting illegal gratification of Rs.30,000/- for processing loan file for grant of subsidy . 3. Heard Mr. Sarat Kumar Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, learned Addl. PP for vigilance in the matter and perused the record. 4. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in custody since 06.05.2026 with submission of charge-sheet in the meantime and there being no requirement of

¶11

Page 1 of 2

¶12

custodial interrogation and keeping in view the status of the petitioner as government servant and the petitioner being entitled to the benefit of first proviso appended to Sec. 480 of BNSS as a lady and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety including the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, this Court without expressing any view on merits, admits the petitioner to bail.

¶13

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following condition:-

¶14

(i) the petitioner shall cooperate the trial. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.269 of BNS,2023 in accordance with law .

¶15

Accordingly, the BLAPL stand disposed of.

¶16

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference.

¶17

Signature Not Verified

¶18

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRIYAJIT SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORI SSA Date: 09-Jul-2026 20:51:27 Jayakrushna

¶19

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶20

Page 2 of 2

Rakshi Meher v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakshi Meher v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

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

D.M National Insurance Co. Ltd.,Cuttack Vs Sasmita Panda

Amareswar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Babulu Kumar Nishad Vs State of Odisha

Bhaktabandhu Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Bhaskar Harijan Vs State of Odisha

Rounak Dubey Vs State of Odisha