Odisha High Court
Criminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

Bail granted after the victim’s testimony materially weakened allegations of kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault.

HASIN NAYAK vs STATE OF ODISHA

Odisha High CourtJUDGMENT: August 31, 20263 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Bail granted after the victim’s testimony materially weakened allegations of kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault.. HASIN NAYAK vs STATE OF ODISHA. Odisha High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioner, Hasin Nayak, sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in two criminal cases: Semiliguda P.S. Case No. 30 of 2026, corresponding to T.R. Case No. 34 of 2026, and Jeypore Town P.S. Case No. 54 of 2026, corresponding to T.R. Case No. 65 of 2026.

Source reference: para. 1; p. 1–2

Both matters were pending before the Special Court under the POCSO Act-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore, and involved the same accused and victim.

Source reference: para. 1; p. 1–2

The alleged offences were under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(m) and 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4(2) and 6 of the POCSO Act.

Source reference: para. 2; p. 2

The prosecution allegation was that the petitioner had kidnapped the victim and committed rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

The petitioner had been in custody since 16 March 2026.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

In one trial, the victim had already been examined and testified that she had gone with the petitioner to Kotpad, that her father had lodged the FIR after they allegedly eloped again, and that she had made statements implicating the petitioner under pressure from her family.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

She also stated that the petitioner had not forced her to do anything.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

In the other case, the victim had stated before the Magistrate that she was in love with the petitioner.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

The trial in one case had commenced, while the victim was yet to be examined in the other.

Source reference: para. 5; p. 4
02

Issues

Whether the petitioner should be released on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in both pending POCSO-related criminal cases, having regard to the victim’s statements and the stage of trial.

Source reference: paras. 2, 4–5; pp. 2–4

Whether bail should be granted subject to conditions safeguarding the victim, witnesses and the integrity of the pending trials.

Source reference: paras. 5–7; pp. 4–5
03

Law Applied

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant bail.

Source reference: no citation

The prosecution cases involved Sections 137(2), 64(2)(m) and 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4(2) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Source reference: para. 2; p. 2

In determining bail, the Court considered the nature of the allegations, the material evidence presently available, the victim’s testimony, the period of custody, and the progress of the trial, without expressing any final opinion on the merits of the prosecution case.

Source reference: para. 5; p. 4

Bail could be conditioned by prohibiting contact with the victim, interference with witnesses, and by requiring periodic attendance before the police.

Source reference: para. 6; p. 4–5
04

Reasoning

The Court noted that although the allegations involved kidnapping, rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault, the victim’s evidence in the commenced trial materially qualified the prosecution version.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

She stated that she had accompanied the petitioner to Kotpad, had implicated him before the police due to pressure from her family, and that he had not forced her to do anything.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

Her statement in the other case that she was in love with the petitioner was also considered.

Source reference: para. 4; p. 3

These circumstances, together with the petitioner’s age of approximately 24 years, his custody since 16 March 2026, and the commencement of trial in one case, persuaded the Court to grant bail in both matters.

Source reference: para. 5; p. 4

The Court expressly clarified that it was not adjudicating the merits of the allegations.

Source reference: para. 5; p. 4

To address the risks of intimidation, influence or interference, bail was made subject to restrictions on contact with the victim and witnesses and to periodic police attendance.

Source reference: para. 6; p. 4–5
05

Holding

The Court allowed both bail applications and directed that Hasin Nayak be released in T.R. Case Nos. 34 and 65 of 2026 upon furnishing bail bonds of ₹50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount in each case, subject to conditions imposed by the trial court.

The petitioner was prohibited from contacting or visiting the victim, threatening or influencing the victim or other witnesses, and was required to report to the jurisdictional police station once every fortnight, preferably on a Sunday between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon, for three months from release.

Source reference: para. 6; p. 5

The police were directed not to detain him unnecessarily after recording attendance, and the State or informant was given liberty to seek cancellation of bail upon violation of the conditions or otherwise in accordance with law.

Source reference: para. 7; p. 5

Both applications were accordingly disposed of.

Source reference: para. 8; p. 6
06

Acts & Sections Cited

6 provisions across 3 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20233

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 20122

Odisha High Court

Original Court PDF

HASIN NAYAKvsSTATE OF ODISHA

Odisha High Court · August 31, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment