Petitioner filed a revision to challenge the order of cognizance in a criminal trial. The High Court dismissed the revision finding no merit but directed the petitioner to surrender for bail within 18 days pending execution of prior non-bailable warrant.
Petitioner directed to surrender within 18 days for bail; revision dismissed.
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 CRLREV No.503 of 2025 (CNR No.ODHC010557102025)
Suraj Sekhar Nayak
…. Petitioner
Mr. B.S. Dasparida, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha & another
…. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Panda, ASC Mr. Mahes Das, Advocate (O.P. No.2)
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK ORDER 09.09.2026
Order No.
Page 1 of 2
counsel for both the sides, this Court is of the view that there is no merit in the revision and hence, the order of cognizance dated 29th May, 2025 at Annexure-3 does not call for any interference. But, at the same time, having regard to the fact that the offences are triable by a Magistrate First Class, this Court is inclined to direct the petitioner to surrender before the learned court below for being released on bail with suitable conditions imposed.
6. Accordingly, it is ordered.
8. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Alok
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: ALOK RANJAN SETHY Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 11-Sep-2026 13:20:50
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order of cognizance under Sections 296/351(2) BNS calls for interference in a revision.
Suraj Sekhar Nayak
State of Odisha
R.K. Pattanaiak
Alok Ranjan Sethy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
