High Court of Orissa allowed bail to the petitioner admitted under S.483 BNSS in a cyber fraud case involving illegal money transfer, recognizing co-accused bail and presuming innocence without expressing merit views.
Bail allowed on furnishing bonds of Rs.25,000 each with two solvent sureties except cash surety.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.7608 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010560442026
Hemanta Lohar
Petitioner
Mr. P.S. Das, proxy counsel on behalf of Mr. M. Das, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha
… Opposite Party
Mr. R.B. Mishra, Addl. PP
CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
Order No. ORDER(ORAL):10.09.2026
01.
Page 1 of 2
has already been submitted. Further, four co-accused persons have already been granted bail. In the aforesaid facts and situation and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-a-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety including the inherent right of the accused-petitioner to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits the petitioner to bail.
Signature Not Verified (G. Satapathy) Digitally SignedSigned by: SUBHASMITA DAS Judge
Digitally SignedSigned by: SUBHASMITA DAS Signed by: SUBHASMITA DAS Designation: Sr. Stenographer Subhasmita Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 10-Sep-2026 20:03:24
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, already in custody, shall be admitted to bail in a cyber fraud case pending before the SDJM.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Hemanta Lohar
State of Odisha
G. Satapathy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
