Odisha High Court
Criminal Procedure and EvidenceCriminal Law

Bail is warranted after charge-sheet filing where prolonged custody and no flight or witness-tampering risk are shown.

NARENDRA NAIK@ARAKHITA vs STATE OF ODISHA

Odisha High CourtJUDGMENT: October 16, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Bail is warranted after charge-sheet filing where prolonged custody and no flight or witness-tampering risk are shown.. NARENDRA NAIK@ARAKHITA vs STATE OF ODISHA. Odisha High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioners sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Industrial (Nisha) P.S. Case No. 97 of 2026, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 337 of 2026, involving an allegation of robbery under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Source reference: p. 2

The alleged property taken included ₹41,406 and mobile phones. The petitioners had been in custody since 26 May 2026, and a charge sheet had been submitted by the time their applications were considered.

Source reference: p. 2; p. 3
02

Issues

Whether the petitioners should be released on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, having regard to the allegations, their period of pre-trial detention, and the circumstances on record

Source reference: p. 2–3

Whether bail should be subject to conditions, including periodic attendance at the jurisdictional police station

Source reference: p. 3
03

Law Applied

The applications were made under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of bail.

Source reference: p. 3

The Court also relied on the presumption that an accused is innocent until proven guilty and considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the period of pre-trial custody, the filing of the charge sheet, and whether there was material suggesting a risk of absconding or witness intimidation.

Source reference: p. 3
04

Reasoning

The Court considered the nature and gravity of the alleged offences alongside the petitioners’ custody since 26 May 2026 and the submission of the charge sheet.

Source reference: p. 3

It also took account of the presumption of innocence and found no material indicating that the petitioners would abscond or threaten witnesses if released. On the record as a whole, the Court concluded that bail was appropriate, without expressing any view on the merits of the case.

Source reference: p. 3
05

Holding

The Court allowed all three bail applications.

Each petitioner was directed to furnish a bond of ₹50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court in seisin of the case. As a condition of release, the petitioners must report to the jurisdictional police station once a fortnight, preferably on a Sunday between 10 a.m. and 12 noon, for three months from their actual date of release. The officer in charge was directed not to detain them unnecessarily after recording their attendance.

Source reference: p. 3–4
06

Acts & Sections Cited

2 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20231

Odisha High Court

Original Court PDF

NARENDRA NAIK@ARAKHITAvsSTATE OF ODISHA

Odisha High Court · October 16, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment