PRIYABRATA BEHERA vs STATE OF ODISHA — ABLAPL/6541/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010419422026

Filing Number

ABLAPL/16502/2026

Filing Date

02-Jun-2026

Registration No

ABLAPL/6541/2026

Registration Date

06-Jun-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice V. Narasingh

Coram

Mr. Justice V. Narasingh

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--Allowed

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PRIYABRATA BEHERA

    Adv. ARIJEET MISHRA,S.K.JENA, S.BISWAL, R.MAHATO, K.P.MUKHI, I.MISHRA,S.K.JENA, S.BISWAL, R.MAHATO, K.P.MUKHI, I.MISHRA, S.K.JENA, S.BISWAL, R.MAHATO, K.P.MUKHI, I.MISHRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ODISHA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice V. NarasinghView PDF

    Summary of ABLAPL/6541/2026 The High Court of Orissa granted pre-arrest bail to Priyabrata Behera, an employee accused of falsifying procurement records at Krupalu Rice Industries by accepting substandard paddy as meeting Fair Average Quality norms. The court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given the documentary nature of evidence and directed his release on bail upon surrender within three weeks, subject to verification of prior criminal history of similar nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Jun-2026

    For Orders - 2

    Mr. Justice V. Narasingh

  4. 02-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. ABLAPL/6541/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of ABLAPL/6541/2026 The High Court of Orissa granted pre-arrest bail to Priyabrata Behera, an employee accused of falsifying procurement records at Krupalu Rice Industries by accepting substandard paddy as meeting Fair Average Quality norms. The court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given the documentary nature of evidence and directed his release on bail upon surrender within three weeks, subject to verification of prior criminal history of similar nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case