LOCHAN ROUT @ LOCHAN KUMAR ROUT ARUN KUMAR BEHERA, S.SAHOO, G.BEHERA, A.K.MOHANTY vs STATE OF ODISHA — ABLAPL/6249/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 17th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010411022026

e-Filing Number

29-05-2026

Filing Number

ABLAPL/16065/2026

Filing Date

29-May-2026

Registration No

ABLAPL/6249/2026

Registration Date

01-Jun-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Coram

Mr. Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 9 )

Sub-Category

Anticipatory Bail Applications ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

17-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.LOCHAN ROUT @ LOCHAN KUMAR ROUT ARUN KUMAR BEHERA, S.SAHOO, G.BEHERA, A.K.MOHANTY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ODISHA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice Aditya Kumar MohapatraView PDF

    The High Court of Orissa dismissed Lochan Rout's anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., 2023, finding it not maintainable. The court held that all offences alleged in the FIR (under Sections 106(1), 125(a), 125(b), and 281 of B.N.S.) were bailable in nature, and therefore there was no apprehension of arrest warranting anticipatory bail protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Jun-2026

    For Orders - Fresh Bail Applications U/S 438 Cr.P.C./482 Bnss

    Mr. Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

  4. 29-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. ABLAPL/6249/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa dismissed Lochan Rout's anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., 2023, finding it not maintainable. The court held that all offences alleged in the FIR (under Sections 106(1), 125(a), 125(b), and 281 of B.N.S.) were bailable in nature, and therefore there was no apprehension of arrest warranting anticipatory bail protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case