The court emphasized the importance of adequate evidence and the presumption of innocence in granting bail in dowry-related cases.

State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panda, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

18.07.2025 Order No.

02. 1. Mr. B.K. Kund, lear ned counsel has entered appearance on behalf of the Informant by filing vakalatnama in ABLAPL No.5894 of 2025. The same is taken on record. Registry is requested to reflect the name of the learned counsel Mr. B.K. Kund in the file, cause list as well as Web Portal of this Court.

2. Since all the ABLAPLs relate to the same FIR, they are heard together on the consent of the parties and are being disposed of by this common order.

3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant in ABLAPL No.5894 of 2025.

4. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Rajnagar P.S. Case No.130 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C (G.N) Rajnagar, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 80(2)/85/103(1)/3(5) of BNS read with Section 4 of D.P. Act .

5. It is apt to note that the Petitioners in ABLAPL No.5894 of 2025 are the mother-in-law and sister-in- laws, Petitioner in ABLAPL No.5141 of 2025 is the elder father-in-law and Petitioners in ABLAPL No.5325 of 2025 are the brother-in-law.

6. It is submitted by the learned for the Petitioners that the Petitioners have been implicated in the case at hand only because they have relationship with the husband of the deceased.

7. It is submitted by the learned counsel that omnibus allegations regarding the demand of dowry have been made and even if the prosecution case is accepted at its face value no case under Section 103(1) of BNS is made out. Hence, the Petitioners may be protected by pre-arrest bail.

8. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the husband has been taken to custody.

9. Learned counsel for the Informant opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail.

10. Learned counsel for the State also refers to the statement of the Informant and submits that taking into account the nature of allegations the Petitioners ought not to be protected by pre-arrest bail.

11. During the course of hearing, this Court perused the Case Diary wherein the opinion of the doctor is reflected and reads as under:-

“i) The above mentioned internal findings are Ante-Mortem in nature and are related/

consistent with Cardio Pulmonary Pathology.

ii) The final opinion regarding cause of the death is reserved/pending chemical analysis of preserved routine viscera which is handed over to escort Police after Autopsy for onward transmission to SFSL Rasulgarh for chemical analysis.

iii) The time since death is within 24 hrs-36 hrs.

iv) The CHL of fetus is 52 CM & approx wt. about 2.5 Kg (2500gm). It is a female fetus. The BPD is about 9.0 CM. Thus it is about approx 9 months (34-36 weeks). That is term foetus with all signs of fetal maturity present.

v) There is absence of any kind of external or internal mechanical injuries.”

12. It is apt to extract the following note in the Case Diary that while forwarding the husband in custody conspicuously there is no mention of the provisions under Section 103(1) of BNS .

“As prima facie evidence well made out U/s- 85/80(2)/3(5) BNS /4 D.P. Act against the accused person Deepak Das (29) S/O- Lt. Abhaya Das Vill-Balisahipatana P.S.-Rajnagar Dist-Kendrapara. I forwarded him (T) escort party after his medical examination.”

13. Considering the manner of accusation and the medical report adverted to hereinabove and the forwarding report of the husband, this Court directs that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper.

14. Before releasing the learned Court shall verify as to whether order of this Court has been assailed