Basudev Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2026)

Basudev Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under S.483 BNSS in respect of Satyabadi PS Case No.228 of 2025 / TR Case No.95 of 2025 charging offences punishable under BNS Ss.127(2)/65(2)/64(2)(m)/351(3) r/w Sec.6 of POCSO Act for rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault, notwithstanding the presumption under S.29 of the POCSO Act and the fact that the victim is yet to be examined.

Court's answer

Having considered the rival submissions, the nature and gravity of the alleged offences vis-a-vis the accusation sought to be brought against the petitioner, the materials placed on record, the statement of the victim and other circumstances on record in entirety including the presumption available under S.29 of the POCSO Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, especially when the victim is yet to be examined.

Ratio / Principle

It is open to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court after examination of the victim.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application (BLAPL No.741 of 2026) under S.483 BNSS filed by Basudev Pradhan before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack seeking bail in connection with Satyabadi PS Case No.228 of 2025, corresponding to TR Case No.95 of 2025, pending before the learned ADJ-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Puri, wherein he is charged with offences punishable under BNS Ss.127(2)/65(2)/64(2)(m)/351(3) r/w Sec.6 of POCSO Act on the main allegation of committing rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the victim. Petitioner's counsel (Mr. Laxminarayan Rayatsingh) submitted that the victim, though summoned, had not yet appeared to depose evidence and that there was admittedly prior enmity between the parties, the petitioner having been falsely implicated; the learned Addl. PP (Mr. M.R. Patra) opposed bail by placing the statement of the victim. Oral order dated 27.04.2026 of Justice G. Satapathy: taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, the materials on record, the statement of the victim and the presumption available under S.29 of the POCSO Act, the Court declined bail at this stage, especially as the victim was yet to be examined; the bail application stands rejected, with liberty to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail before the learned trial Court after examination of the victim; the BLAPL accordingly stands disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.741 of 2026

Basudev Pradhan … Petitioner

Mr. L. Rayatsingh, Advocate

-versus-

State of Orissa & Another … Opposite Parties

Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP

Order No.

04.

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL)27.04.2026

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

This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Satyabadi PS Case No.228 of 2025 corresponding to TR Case No.95 of 2025 pending in the file of learned ADJcum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Puri for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.127(2)/ 65(2)/ 64(2)(m)/351(3) of BNS r/w Sec.6 of POCSO Act, on the main allegation of committing rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the victim.

In the course of hearing, Mr. Laxminarayan Rayatsingh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the victim has been summoned to depose evidence, but she has not yet appeared in the Court to depose evidence and there is admittedly prior enmity between the parties and thereby, the petitioner having been falsely implicated in this case, the bail application of the petitioner may kindly be allowed.

Page 1 of 2

3.1 On the other hand, Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. PP by placing the statement of the victim prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner. 4. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-a-vis the accusation sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the materials placed on record together with the statement of the victim and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety including the presumption as available U/S.29 of the POCSO Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, especially when the victim is yet to be examined.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stand rejected. It is open to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court, after examination of the victim.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court.

(G. Satapathy) Judge

Signature Not Verified Jayakrushna

Digitally Signed Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 29-Apr-2026 12:48:14

Page 2 of 2