BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court

"The Petitioner is a lady and she is in custody since 24.05.2025, but the trial is yet to commence... taking into account the alleged role played by the Petitioner and there being little apprehension against the Petitioner for tampering with the prosecution materials because of submission of charge sheet in the meantime, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits the petitioner to bail," Orissa High Court, in a significant ruling dated July 1, 2026, held that a woman accused of conspiracy in a murder case is entitled to bail if the charge sheet has been submitted and there is no evidence of absconding risk.

A bench of Justice G. Satapathy observed that the petitioner’s status as a woman with children and her prolonged period in custody were pivotal factors in granting relief, especially when the trial was yet to commence.

The petitioner, Mamata Nagesh, was arrested in connection with the murder of Lagnia Sunani, who went missing on May 13, 2025. Following the recovery of the body on May 21, 2025, the investigation revealed an alleged conspiracy involving the petitioner, her husband, and others, purportedly triggered by an illicit affair between the deceased and the petitioner. The petitioner had been in custody since May 24, 2025, facing charges under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2), and 3(5) of the BNS.

The primary question before the court was whether the petitioner should be granted bail under Section 483 of the BNSS given the nature of her alleged involvement in the conspiracy. The court also examined whether the completion of the investigation and the petitioner's personal circumstances warranted her release during the pendency of the trial.

Basis of Implication and Custody Period

The court noted that the deceased went missing in May 2025 and his body was recovered approximately a week later. The bench observed that the petitioner was implicated primarily on the basis of a statement recorded under Section 23(2) of the BSA and the recovery of the deceased's mobile phone. It was noted that while the main allegations of the killing were directed at the petitioner’s husband and others, the petitioner was accused of calling the deceased to the spot.

Court Highlights Petitioner’s Status and Family Responsibilities

Justice Satapathy emphasized that the petitioner is a woman who has been in custody for over a year since May 24, 2025. The court found it significant that the trial had not yet commenced. Furthermore, the bench pointed out that the petitioner has children at home, which serves as a factor against the likelihood of her fleeing from justice.

"No material has been collected to indicate that the Petitioner would abscond in the event of her enlargement on bail. Besides, the Petitioner is also having children in her house."

Submission of Charge Sheet Mitigates Tampering Apprehension

The court reasoned that since the charge sheet had already been submitted by the investigating agency, there was "little apprehension" of the petitioner tampering with the prosecution materials. The bench held that in the absence of any material suggesting a risk of absconding or interference with the judicial process, the petitioner could be admitted to bail without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Warning Against Non-Appearance Under BNS

While allowing the application, the court imposed strict conditions regarding the petitioner's attendance at the trial. The bench stipulated that the petitioner must attend the trial court on every date of posting. It warned that any failure to appear without sufficient cause would allow the trial court to proceed against her for the offence under Section 269 of the BNS, 2023, which pertains to non-appearance in obedience to a public servant's order.

"In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.269 of BNS, 2023 in accordance with law."

The bail application was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with one solvent surety. The ruling reaffirms the principle that pre-trial detention should not be prolonged unnecessarily when the investigation is complete and the accused poses no flight risk, particularly in cases involving women with domestic responsibilities.

Date of Decision: 01 July 2026