BILASH CHANDRA RAJ SUJIT KUMAR DAS, A.K.DAS, R.B.DAS, P.NAIK vs STATE OF ODISHA — BLAPL /1250/2026

Case under Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 439. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 25th March 2026.

CNR: ODHC010048992026

CASE DISPOSED

e-Filing Number

20-01-2026

Filing Number

BLAPL /2173/2026

Filing Date

20-01-2026

Registration No

BLAPL /1250/2026

Registration Date

04-02-2026

Judge

MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

Coram

MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 9 )

Sub-Category

Regular Bail Applications ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

25th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 Section 439
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

BILASH CHANDRA RAJ SUJIT KUMAR DAS, A.K.DAS, R.B.DAS, P.NAIK

Respondent(s)

STATE OF ODISHA

Hearing History

Judge: MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

19-03-2026

FOR ORDERS - FRESH BAIL APPLICATIONS U/S 439 Cr.P.C.

25-03-2026

TOP OF THE LIST

24-03-2026

FOR ORDERS - ADJOURNED BAIL APPLICATIONS U/S 439 Cr.P.C.

23-03-2026

FOR ORDERS - FRESH BAIL APPLICATIONS U/S 439 Cr.P.C.

Orders

25-03-2026
MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

The High Court of Orissa rejected both the interim bail application and the main bail application of petitioner Bilash Chandra Raj in a cyber fraud case involving online investment scams. The court found that while his daughter's medical condition (VSD) did not require his presence at home, the serious nature of allegations against him—including involvement in 98 similar cases, cheating Rs.30 lakhs, and receiving Rs.12.38 crores in fraudulent transactions—warranted continued detention due to flight risk. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa rejected both the interim bail application and the main bail application of petitioner Bilash Chandra Raj in a cyber fraud case involving online investment scams. The court found that while his daughter's medical condition (VSD) did not require his presence at home, the serious nature of allegations against him—including involvement in 98 similar cases, cheating Rs.30 lakhs, and receiving Rs.12.38 crores in fraudulent transactions—warranted continued detention due to flight risk. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case