Gyanendra Swain v. State of Odisha

Petitioner Mr. S.K. Panigrahi, Advocate …. -Versus- State of Odisha Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Brahma, ASC …. ABLAPL No.6439 of 2026 Pintu @ Srimanta Bhoi Petitioner Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate …. -Versus- State of Odisha Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Brahma, ASC …. ABLAPL No.6643 of 2026 Rabindra Kumar Padhan Petitioner Mr. B.R. Mohanty, Advocate …. -Versus- State of Odisha Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Brahma, ASC …. A N D ABLAPL No.7308 of 2026 Diganta Pradhan Petitioner Mr. B.R. Mohanty, Advocate …. -Versus- State of Odisha Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Brahma, ASC …. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 08.07.2026

#1. All the ABLAPLs are taken up together and disposed of by the following common order.

#3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. Instant petitions have been filed under Section 482 BNSS by the petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Kiakata P.S. Case No.67 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.671 of 2026 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Athamallick on the grounds stated.

#4. Recorded the submissions of learned counsels for the petitioners and Mr. Brahma, learned ASC for the State.

#5. Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1(in all the ABLAPLs). Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the petitioners do not have any other antecedents. It is further submitted that the case under Section 310(2) BNS is registered but not a case of dacoity. It is claimed that the alleged incident is an outcome of road rage. The further claim is that no specific details have been provided in the FIR regarding the amounts snatched away from the victims by the accused persons. The case diary is submitted to the Court by Mr. Brahma, learned ASC and the same is gone through. The amounts said to have been taken away from the victims travelling in an autorickshaw are revealed in the case diary. The names of the petitioners have also been revealed during investigation. The maximum of the amount snatched away would be of less than ten thousand. The submission is that the incident has been given a colour of dacoity. The Court, considering the circumstances under which the alleged incident took place and the claim that the mobile phones and cash said to have been recovered and seized by the local police, which is, however, not revealed from the case diary except with regard to the seizure of the vehicles involved, is inclined to direct the petitioners, who said to have no other similar antecedents, to surrender before the learned court below for being released with stringent conditions, even though their bail plea is not entertained.

#7. Accordingly, it is ordered. In the result, the ABLAPLs are disposed of with the direction as aforesaid. It is directed that in the event, the petitioners surrender before the court of learned S.D.J.M., Athamallick in connection with G.R. Case No.671 of 2026 corresponding to Kiakata P.S. Case No.67 of 2026 within a fortnight from today, they shall be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-(rupees twenty five thousand) each with one solvent surety for the like amount each with such other conditions imposed as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is further directed that the petitioners shall be released only if they are having no similar antecedents.

#8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Balaram Judge