Ashik Khadia Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2026)

Ashik Khadia Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount, subject to conditions of no contact with or visit to the victim and no threatening, inducing, influencing or coercing of witnesses till disposal of the case; urgent certified copy of the order ordered and soft copy to be communicated to the concerned Court/Jail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 31.05.2022 in Special G.R. Case No.103 of 2022 (Bandamunda P.S. Case No. 94 of 2022, POCSO/FTSC, Rourkela) for offences under ss.363/376(2)(n)/376(3) read with s.6 of the POCSO Act, should be granted bail under S.483 BNSS, given that the trial is unlikely to conclude soon and the victim is not appearing to depose despite summons.

Court's answer

Despite the seriousness of the allegation, the right to speedy trial is an integral right of an accused guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and prolonged pre-trial detention weighs in favour of granting bail.

Ratio / Principle

Taking into account the victim's failure to depose despite summons, the petitioner's long pre-trial detention, the mandate of Sec.35(2) of the POCSO Act and the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the Court admitted the petitioner to bail expressly without expressing any view on merit.

Key takeaways

Bail granted on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two solvent sureties each 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.ratio¶13
Bail condition (i): the petitioner shall not contact the victim in any way or manner and shall not visit the house or village of the victim till disposal of the case.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BLAPL No.843 of 2026, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Justice G. Satapathy, oral order, 15.04.2026) — Ashik Khadia v. State of Odisha & Anr.: bail application under S.483 BNSS allowed in respect of Special G.R. Case No.103 of 2022 (Bandamunda P.S. Case No. 94 of 2022) pending before the Ad-hoc Addl. District & Sessions Judge (FTSC) (POCSO), Rourkela, for offences punishable under ss.363/376(2)(n)/376(3) read with s.6 of the POCSO Act (kidnapping, rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault). Although the allegation was acknowledged as serious, the Court held that the right to speedy trial is an integral right of an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution; with the petitioner in custody since 31.05.2022, the trial unlikely to conclude soon, the victim repeatedly failing to depose despite summons (BW issued against CSWs 1, 4 & 6 per order sheets dated 02.01.2026 and 21.01.2026), and regard had to the mandate of Sec.35(2) of the POCSO Act and the presumption of innocence, bail was admitted without expressing any view on merit — on a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties of like amount, conditioned on (i) no contact with or visit to the victim's house/village till disposal of the case and (ii) no threatening, inducing, influencing or coercing of witnesses including the victim's family members. BLAPL stood disposed of accordingly.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.843 of 2026

Ashik Khadia … Petitioner Mr. P.R. Nayak, Proxy counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. B. Swain, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha & Another … Opposite Parties Mr. S.C. Pradhan, Addl. PP

Order No.

02.

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) : 15.04.2026

This is an application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Bandamunda P.S. Case No. 94 of 2022 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.103 of 2022 pending in the file of learned Ad-hoc Addl. District & Sessions Judge(FTSC) (POCSO), Rourkela, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 363/ 376(2)(n)/ 376(3) read with section-6 of the POCSO Act, on the main allegation of kidnapping the victim and committing rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her.

Heard, Mr. Pratyush Ranjan Nayak, learned proxy counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Bisworanjan Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record.

Mr. Nayak has also provided the certified copy of the order sheet dated 02.01.2026 and 21.01.2026, which reveals that BW has already been issued against CSWs.1, 4 & 6 for their absence in the Court after service of summons personally. The petitioner is in custody since 31.05.2022 and the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. No doubt the allegation against the petitioner is serious, but right to speedy trial is also an integral right of an accused as

Page 1 of 2

guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, especially when the victim is not turning up to depose despite summons being issued and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in custody since long and taking into account the mandate of Sec.35(2) of the POCSO Act and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety including the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial, this Court without expressing any view on merit, admits the petitioner to bail.

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) only with two solvent sureties each 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 conditions:-

(i) the petitioner shall not contact the victim in any way or in any manner and he shall not visit to the house or village of the victim till disposal of the case,

(ii) the petitioner shall not threaten, induce, influence or coerce any of the witnesses including the family members of the victim acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts before the Court.

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, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference.

Signature Not Verified

S.Sasmal

(G. Satapathy) Judge

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 16-Apr-2026 11:15:35

Page 2 of 2