High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 OHC CK 1947

Santosh Kumar Barad vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court, Cuttack Bench · Decided on 19 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
G. Satapathy, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
BLAPL NO.6408 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 312 words

G. Satapathy, J.

1.

This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Berhampur Cyber PS Case No.100 of 2025 corresponding to GR Case No.3412 of 2025 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Berhampur, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.318(2)/318(4)/319(2)/336(2) /338/336(3)/340(2) of BNS r/w Section 66(D) of IT Act, on the main allegation of deceiving the informant for a sum of Rs.55 Lakhs to provide a job to his son.

2.

Heard, Mr. Biswa Ranjan Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record.

3.

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears not only allegation against the petitioner for deceiving the informant for a sum of Rs.55 Lakhs to provide a job to his son, but also five more cases have been registered against him. The bail application of the co-accused Gitanjali Barad, who is the wife of the petitioner has already ben rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by taking into consideration her criminal proclivity and the materials on record. In the aforesaid facts and situation and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-‡-vis the allegation sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the implication of the petitioner in other five criminal cases and keeping in view the circumstance under which a person has been cheated and the implication of the petitioner for offence U/S.338 of BNS, which prescribes punishment up to imprisonment for life, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned Court in seisin over the matter.