The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2425 of 2025 Kunal Behera Petitioner(s) Mr. Kedar Chandra Sarangi, Adv. …. State of Odisha CORAM: -versus- …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Pradipta Satapathy, ASC HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Sections 318(2), 64, Sections 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Order No. F.I.R. No. 0198 17.10.2024 Mohana S.T. Police Station Dated
Decision
ORDER 09.05.2025 Case No. and Courts’ Name Case No.04/2025 pending the Court of in Addl. learned Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi arising out of G.R. Case No.294 of 2024 and further arising out of Mohana P.S. Case No.198 of 2024 of learned J.M.F.C, Mohana 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with S.T. Case No.04/2025 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Page 1 of 6 Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi arising out of G.R. Case No.294 of 2024 and further arising out of Mohana P.S. Case No.198 of 2024 of learned J.M.F.C, Mohana registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections Sections 64, 318(2), 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, has filed this application for his release on bail. 4. The brief fact of the case is that after giving assurance of marriage the Petitioner kept physical relationship with the victim/informant. Thereafter, at some point of time the Petitioner has also taken some money from the informant. After keeping physical relationship and taking money from the informant since the Petitioner denied to get married with the informant, the informant lodged an F.I.R. before the local Police Station. Accordingly, upon lodging of the F.I.R and completion of investigation the Petitioner was arrested and has been languishing in custody since 19.10.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is also no credible material on record to connect him to the alleged offenses. The Petitioner has been in custody since 19.10.2024. In light of these facts, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for releasing the Petitioner on bail, as continued detention is unjustified in the absence of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48 substantial evidence. Page 2 of 6 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail application, contending that the Petitioner is an accused of serious and heinous offenses. It is submitted that the Petitioner established physical relationship with the victim under false assurances of marriage. Given the egregious nature of allegations and the potential for evidence tampering, learned counsel for the State strongly opposes grant of bail to the Petitioner. 7. This Court finds it necessary to observe that in cases pertaining to the allegations of sexual offences arising from relationships developed on the basis of a purported promise of marriage, the issue of consent must be approached with careful consideration. While the law recognizes that consent obtained through deception or coercion may not be valid, it is equally important to acknowledge the principle of sexual autonomy, which presumes that an individual is capable of making voluntary choices unless demonstrably impaired. Allegations that consent was vitiated solely on the ground of a failed promise may not, in every case, constitute an offence, particularly where the nature of the relationship suggests mutual engagement over a sustained period. Premature conclusions regarding lack of consent, in the absence of clear indicators of coercion or bad faith, may cause unfair prejudice. Each case must, therefore, turn on Page 3 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48 its own facts, and courts must tread cautiously in drawing inferences at the pre-trial stage. 8. This Court had an occasion to deal with a case of similar facts to this case i.e. in CRLMC No.4485 of 2024 (Manoj Kumar Munda –vrs. State of Odisha & Anr.) wherein the Petitioner/ alleged accused had challenged the proceeding initiated against him for commission of the alleged offences under Sections 376(2)(a), 376(2)(i), 376(2)(n), 294, 506, and 34 of the I.P.C. This Court vide judgment dated 14.02.2025 taking into account the various judicial pronouncements of the Supreme Court had made an elaborate discussions on the concept of consent and the issue of sexual autonomy and allowed the CRLMC No.4485 of 2024 quashing the proceedings against the Petitioner. The ordering portion of the said judgment is extracted herein below: “36. The legal system, by criminalizing sex under a “false promise of marriage,” upholds this performative construct, one that assumes that women engage in sexual relationships only as a prelude to matrimony, rather than as autonomous agents of their own desires. 37. In its pursuit of justice, the law must not become an instrument of moral policing. It must acknowledge that sexual agency is not a promise, nor is it a contract that mandates a predetermined outcome. To assume otherwise is to deny women the full measure of their autonomy, desire, and choice, reducing them to mere bearers of honour, Page 4 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48 is in this rather than as individuals possessing an intrinsic right to their own bodies and decisions. … 39. It light that the automatic criminalization of failed relationships under the guise of “false promise of marriage” must be scrutinized. The assumption that every physical relationship between a man and a woman carries the implicit condition of matrimony is not a principle of law but a vestige of control.” 9. Considering the facts and circumstances, and keeping in view the submissions of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, and the view taken in Manoj Kumar Munda (supra), this Court is of the view that the Petitioner should be granted bail by the court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case. This Court, accordingly, directs the court in seisin over the matter to release the Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid case on some stringent terms and conditions with further conditions that:- i. ii. iii. iv. v. the Petitioner shall appear before the in every local Police Station concerned fortnight on Monday between 10.00A.M. to 1.00P.M. till conclusion of the trial; the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal activities in future; the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner; the Petitioner shall not threaten the victim or her family members in any manner; the Petitioner after the onset of monsoon (between June, 2025 to August, 2025), shall plant 400 saplings of local variety like mango, neem, tamarind etc. in and around his village Page 5 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48 over the Government land/ community land/ private land, if it is in the possession of the Petitioner or his family members. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 10. The District Nursery/D.F.O shall extend the helping hand by supplying the saplings to the Petitioner and the Revenue Authority shall assist the Petitioner in identifying the location for plantation of the saplings. If the land is not available, the Petitioner to approach the Revenue Authority for identifying the land for plantation and the Revenue Authority shall do the needful. 11. The I.I.C. of the concerned Police Station in coordination with the local Forest Officer shall monitor; whether the Petitioner has planted the saplings or not. 12. It is further made clear that the Petitioner shall file an affidavit after plantation of the saplings before the local Police Station assuring that he will maintain those plants for two years. The said affidavit be also produced before the learned court below at the time of trial. 13. This BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Ayaskanta Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-May-2025 12:26:48 Page 6 of 6