Uttam Kumar Sharma vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party(S) on 2 May, 2026

    0
    29
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Orissa High Court

    Uttam Kumar Sharma vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party(S) on 2 May, 2026

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
    
                                 ABLAPL No.2670 of 2026
    
             Uttam Kumar Sharma             ....            Petitioner(s)
    
                                  Mr. Pabitra Kumar Nayak, Advocate
                                      -versus-
            State of Odisha                 ....    Opposite Party(s)
                                         Mr. Debaraj Mohanty, AGA
    
                     CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
    
                                       ORDER
    
    Order No.                        02.05.2026
      02.     1.     Heard.
    
    

    2. The petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in

    connection with Bandamunda P.S. Case No.86 of 2026

    SPONSORED

    corresponding to G.R. Case No.338 of 2026 registered

    for alleged commission of offences punishable under

    Sections 318(4)/340(2)/336(3)/61(2)/112(2) of the

    BNS, 2023, read with Sections 3/4/5 of Orissa

    Prevention of Gambling Act, 1954 r/w Section

    66(C)/66(D) of the I.T. Act, 2000, pending in the Court

    of the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela.

    3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction

    from the petitioner, submits that except the present

    bail application, no other bail application of the
    Page 1 of 3
    petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the

    aforesaid F.I.R.

    4. At the outset, Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional

    Government Advocate appearing for the State submits

    that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents.

    5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

    out of three criminal antecedents, in one of the cases

    he has already been acquitted. Learned counsel for the

    petitioner also submits that except the present

    petitioner, all other co-accused persons have already

    been admitted to bail. Therefore, the petitioner is

    entitled to parity.

    6. Be that as it may, in view of the criminal

    antecedents of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant

    anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the

    anticipatory bail application is rejected. However, it is

    open for the petitioner to surrender before the trial

    Court and move regular bail application taking all the

    grounds including the ground of parity. If such regular

    bail application is moved by the petitioner before the

    Court below, the same shall be considered by the

    Page 2 of 3
    Courts below on merits in accordance with law on the

    dame day.

    7. It is open for the petitioner to urge all the

    grounds in the regular bail application including the

    ground of parity.

    8. With the aforementioned observation, the

    ABLAPL is disposed of.

    (S.S. Mishra)
    Judge

    Subhasis

    Signature Not Verified
    Digitally Signed
    Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY
    Designation: Personal Assistant
    Reason: Authentication
    Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
    Date: 02-May-2026 16:07:20

    Page 3 of 3



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here