KUNJAM HIDMA @ MOHAN vs STATE OF ODISHA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

BLAPL No.5572 of 2026

CNR No. ODHC010406342026

(In the matter of application under Section 483 of the
BNSS ).

Kunjam Hidma @ Mohan Petitioner
…
-versus-

State of Odisha … Opposite Party


For Petitioner : Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate

For Opposite Party : Mr. T.K. Acharya, Addl. PP

CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

DATE OF HEARING & DATE OF JUDGMENT:01.09.2026 (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 Baipariguda PS
Case No.111 of 2025 corresponding to GR Case No.579 of 2025
pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Koraput for
commission of offences punishable under Sections
147/148/109(1)/61(2) of B.N.S r/w Sec.27 of Arms Act and 04
of Explosive Substances Act and Sec.17 of Criminal Law
Amendment Act.
BLAPL No.5572 of 2026
Page 1 of 4

2. The allegation against the petitioner in gist is that the
petitioner being a member of Andhra-Odisha Border Maoist
organization had opened fired to the police party, along with
other persons and he was apprehended from the spot with
huge incriminating materials like Arms and ammunitions and
several communication articles.
3. Heard Mr. Arijeet Mishra, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Addl. PP in the matter
and perused the record.
4. After having considered the rival submissions upon
perusal of record, it appears that the petitioner was found from
the spot, along with AK-47 rifle loaded with magazine and the
petitioner has previous criminal antecedents in following five
cases: -
(i) Baipariguda PS Case No.40 of 2017 for commission
of offence U/S.120/121(A)/307 of IPC r/w
Sec.16(1)(b)/18(a)/20 of UAP Act and 25/27 of Arms
Act;

(ii) Boipariguda PS Case No.145 of 2021 for
commission of offence U/S.143/120-B/121/121-A/149
of IPC r/w Sec.10/18/20 of UAP Act and Sec.25/27 of
Arms Act;

(iii) Mathili PS Case No.144 of 2021 for commission of
offence U/S.147/148/121/121-A/307/149 of IPC r/w
Sec.25/27 of Arms Act/ Cr.LA Act/13/18/20 of UAP
Act;

BLAPL No.5572 of 2026
Page 2 of 4

(iv) Mathili PS Case No.155 of 2021 for commission of
offence U/S.120-B/ 121/ 121-A/ 124/ 124-A/ 307/
147/ 148/ 149 of IPC r/w Sec.25/27 of Arms Act/17
Cr. L.A Act/16(1)(b)/18/20 of UAP Act;

(v) Mathili PS Case No.159 of 2021 for commission of
offence U/S.147/148/121/121-A/307/149 of IPC r/w
Sec.25/27 of Arms Act/17 Cr. L.A Act/13/18/20 of UAP
Act.

It, however, appears from the record that the
petitioner has not disclosed his criminal antecedents in this bail
application, but the forwarding report clearly suggest that the
petitioner is having five criminal antecedents and the same are
under different Sections of UAP Act and other allied offences. In
the context of suppression of material facts, this Court it
relevant to refer to the decision in Munnesh Vrs. State of
Uttar Pradesh; 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1319 , wherein the
Apex Court at Paragraph 9 of the decision has held as under: -

“9. xx xx xx, since the petitioner has suppressed
material facts with regard to his involvement in
criminal cases, he is not entitled to the
discretionary relief of bail. xx xx”.

5. In the aforesaid premises and on consideration of
materials placed on record together with suppression of
criminal antecedent by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined
to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
BLAPL No.5572 of 2026
Page 3 of 4

6. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands
rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft
copy of this judgment may immediately be transmitted to the
Court concerned.

(G. Satapathy)

Judge






Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
st
Dated the 01 Day of September, 2026/ Jayakrushna
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH
Designation: Jr. Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIgh Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 01-Sep-2026 19:13:33

BLAPL No.5572 of 2026
Page 4 of 4