KARTIKA SAMAL vs STATE OF ODISHA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL NO.5968 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010376572026
(In the matter of application under Section 483 of
BNSS, 2023).

Kartika Samal … Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha … Opposite Party


For Petitioner : Mr. Mr.D.Das, Advocate

For Opposite Party : Mr. R.B.Mishra, Addl. PP
Mr.G.Parida, Advocate for
(Informant)

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY



DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:08.09.2026(ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.

1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by
the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with
Kujang PS Case No. 258 of 2025 corresponding to CT
Case No. 114 of 2025 (GR Case No.640 of 2025)
pending in the file of learned JMFC(P), Kujang, for
being charge sheeted for commission of offences
punishable U/Ss. 85/108/103(1)/316(2)/3(5) of BNS,
on the main allegation of committing murder of his wife
by subjecting her to torture and cruelty and for
BLAPL No.5968 of 2026 Page 1 of 5

dishonestly misappropriating the dowry articles, along
with co-accused persons in furtherance of their
common intention.
2. In the course of hearing, Mr.Debasnan Das,
learned counsel for the petitioner by filing the copy of
the order passed in ABLAPL No. 771 of 2026 & BLAPL
NO. 12371 of 2025 submits that co-accused parents-in-
law and brother-in-law have already been admitted to
bail, but the petitioner-cum-husband was never present
at the scene of occurrence and at best, his role is
limited/confined to instigating the co-accused to
commit the crime, however, such co-accused persons
have already been admitted to bail and thereby, the
present petitioner-cum-husband may kindly be granted
bail.
2.1. In opposing the prayer for bail of the
petitioner, Mr. Gokulananda Parida, learned counsel for
the informant submits that not only the petitioner has
instigated the co-accused to commit the murder of the
deceased, but also he is instrumental in such act,
BLAPL No.5968 of 2026 Page 2 of 5

however, he could not dispute about the grant of bail to
co-accused persons in this case. Further, Mr.Parida by
placing the facts on record, prays to reject the bail
application of the petitioner.
2.2. On the other hand, Mr.R.B.Mishra, learned
Addl. PP by placing the statement of one neighbour of
the deceased submits that the petitioner has got
definite role in accomplishing the crime and thereby,
the bail application of the petitioner may kindly be
rejected.
3. After having considered the rival submissions
upon perusal of record, there appears no dispute about
grant of bail to co-accused parents-in-law and brother-
in-law in ABLAPL No. 771 of 2026 and BLAPL No. 12371
of 2025, but Mr. Parida, learned counsel for the
informant on being asked, is candid enough to apprise
this Court that the informant has not challenged such
orders in higher forum. Besides, it is also found from
the record that the petitioner was not present at the
scene of occurrence, rather co-accused who were
BLAPL No.5968 of 2026 Page 3 of 5

allegedly present at the scene of occurrence have
already been granted bail. The main allegation is
against the father-in-law for procuring the poison,
which was later on found to have been the cause of
death of the deceased. In the aforesaid facts and
circumstance and on consideration of materials placed
on record, especially when the husband was not
present at the scene of occurrence in the house at the
relevant time and taking into account the pre-trial
detention of the petitioner in custody with submission
of charge sheet in the meantime and there being no
material collected to suggest that the petitioner would
abscond or pose threat to the witnesses, if released on
bail, this Court without expressing any view on merits,
admits the petitioner to bail.
4. Hence, the bail application of the Petitioner
stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on
bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the
like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in
BLAPL No.5968 of 2026 Page 4 of 5

seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as
deem fit and proper by it.
5. 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.
(G. Satapathy)
Judge











Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
th
Dated the 08 day of September, 2026/Kishore

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: KISHORE KUMAR SAHOO
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 08-Sep-2026 20:33:22
BLAPL No.5968 of 2026 Page 5 of 5