Allowed

Aju Mohanta v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC9 Sept 2026CRLA/368/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal against an order refusing bail, the High Court of Orissa admitted the appellants to bail under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, considering their pre-trial detention, the victim's improved health, and lack of absconding risk.

What did the court decide?

Appellants admitted to bail with conditions: not to contact the injured victim or his family members; release may include terms other than cash surety.

Aju Mohanta Vs State of Orissa — Caste Atrocities | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.368 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010266272026

¶2

Aju Mohanta & another

¶3

… Appellants Mr. A.K. Behera, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha & Another … Respondents

¶6

Mr. T.K. Acharya, Addl. PP

¶7

Order No.

¶8

06.

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL): 09.09.2026

¶10

This Criminal Appeal Under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 together with amendment Act, 2016 (in short, “the Act”) in nature of bail is directed against the impugned order dated 02.04.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, Baripada in C.T. Case No.03 of 2026 arising out of Betnoty P.S. Case No. 16 of 2026 refusing to grant bail to the appellants for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 126(2)/ 296/ 115(2)/ 109/ 351(3)/3(5) of BNS r/w. Secs. 3(1)(r)(s)/3(2)(v)(va) of the Act, on the main allegation of attempting to the life of the injured Lasa Hembram belonging to ST category by assaulting him with a split wood, along with co-accused persons in furtherance of their common intention by taking advantage of his caste.

¶11

Heard, Mr. Arun Kumar Behera, learned counsel appearing virtually for the appellants and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record.

¶12

After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the appellants vis-à-vis the

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

accusations sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the appellants in custody since 13.01.2026 & 18.01.2026 with submission of charge sheet in the meantime and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety including the written instruction received from the IIC, Betnoty P.S. revealing about the present health condition of the injured to be walkable and keeping in view the inherent right of the accused-appellants to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial and trial being not likely to commence in near future and lastly, no material being collected to suggest that the appellants would abscond or pose threat to the witnesses, if released on bail, this Court without expressing any view on merit, considers it proper to admit each of the appellants to bail.

¶15

Hence, the CRLA stands allowed and the impugned order is, hereby, set aside. Consequently, the appellants are directed to be released on bail on such terms and conditions except cash surety as deem fit and proper by the learned Court in seisin over the matter with following condition:-

¶16

( i) the appellants shall not contact the injuredvictim and his family members in any way or in any manner.

¶17

Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal stands disposed of. 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.

¶18

(G. Satapathy)

¶19

Signature Not Verified S.Sasmal

¶20

S.Sasmal

¶21

Judge

¶22

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-Sep-2026 19:44:58

¶23

Page 2 of 2

Aju Mohanta v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aju Mohanta v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases