SAFIUL HUDA v. STATE OF ODISHA
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2026-04-09. SAFIUL HUDA v. STATE OF ODISHA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Safiul Huda … Petitioners (In BLAPL No. 1211 of 2026) Khursid Rabbani (In BLAPL No. 1282 of 2026) Jamil Aktar (In BLAPL No. 1387 of 2026) Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate (In BLAPL Nos. 1211 & 1387 of 2026) Mr. A. R. Panda, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 1282 of 2026) -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. C. Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM:JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL): 09. 04. 2026 Order No. 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these three bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. These are bail applications U/S. 483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Barbil P. S. Case No. 39 of 2025 corresponding to S. T. Case No. 118 of 2025 (G. R. Case No. 100 of 2025) pending in the file of learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Champua, Keonjhar, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 140(2)/61(2)/ 3(5) of BNS, on the main allegation of abducting one Nimananda Pradhan and demanding ransom of Rs. 2,00,000,00/- from his wife, along with co-accused persons and eventually securing ransom amount of Rs. 60,00,000/- from her for his release. 4. Heard, Mr. Arijeet Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners in BLAPL Nos. 1211 & 1387 of 2026, Mr. Amulya Ratna Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 1282 of 2026 and Mr. M. R. Patra, learned Addl. PP in these matters and perused the record. On being queried about the criminal antecedents of the petitioners, Mr. Mishra and Mr. Panda jointly volunteer to withhold bail to the petitioners, if they are found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature. 5.
Admittedly, these are the subsequent bail applications by petitioners, but they have renewed their prayer for bail after examination of ten witnesses, but none of the ten witnesses examined so far has specifically stated against the petitioners. Besides, the allegation against the petitioner-Khursid Rabbani is for arranging a vehicle for transportation of the abducted person from one place to another place, whereas the allegation against the petitioners- Safiul Huda and Jamil Aktar is for hatching conspiracy with other co-accused persons. Besides, the petitioners have not been identified in the TI Parade. Further, out of the ransom money of Rs. 60,00,000/-, a sum of Rs. 50,90,000/- is stated to have already been recovered. It is, however, claimed that the petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents, but in the meantime, the petitioners have already been in custody for more than one year and the trial is yet to be concluded.
It is further volunteered by the learned counsel for the petitioners to withhold bail to the petitioners, if they are found to have any criminal antecedent. 6. In the aforesaid facts and situation and taking into account the pre-trial detention of the petitioners in custody and the recovery of the substantial amount of the ransom money and the petitioners being not identified in TI parade and the trial having commenced in the meantime with examination of 10 witnesses, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits each of the petitioners to bail, but subject to verification of their criminal antecedents. 7. Hence, these three bail applications of the petitioners namely Safiul Huda (BLAPL No. 1211 of 2026), Khursid Rabbani (BLAPL No. 1282 of 2026) and Jamil Aktar (BLAPL No. 1387 of 2026) stand allowed and the petitioners are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it. In view of the specific submission for the petitioners, the benefit of the aforesaid order shall not be extended to the concerned petitioner(s), if he/they is/are found to have criminal antecedent(s). 8. Accordingly, these BLAPLs stand disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference. (G. Satapathy) Judge S. Sasmal
Source: High Court of Orissa. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.