Allowed

Manoj Kumar Nath v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC3 Dec 2016ABLAPL/18600/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners apprehending arrest in a cheating and forgery case. The Court held that the benefit of the first proviso to Section 437 CrPC applies due to lack of tampering allegations and confirmed their residential status, dispensing with prior officer accompaniment. The order was disposed of with directions to cooperate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; arrestees shall be released on bail by arresting officer with terms deemed just; directed to cooperate with investigation.

2. Petitioners are apprehending arrest for the alleged commission of offences under Section s 420/406/467/468/471/120-B of the I.P.C. in G.R. Case No.687/2013 of the court of learned S.D .J.M., Dhenkanal arising out of Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.143(26)/2013.

3. It is apparent from the record that Manoj Kumar Nath has been investigated by the CID (CB) P.S. Case NO.39 (EOW) of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2498/2012. He was also inve stigated for the self-same offence in Angul P.S. Case No.408/2013 corresponding to G.R. Case N o.1141/2013.

4. As per the orders passed in BLAPL No.18857/2012 on 4.9.2013 he has already been granted anticipatory bail in Cuttack CID, CB P.S. Case No.39/2013 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2498/ 2012. He has also been granted anticipatory bail as per order dated 22.11.2013 in BLAPL No.18 587/2013. Petitioner no.1 is a permanent resident of village Susuda, in the district of Angul . Hence there is no chance of his absconding from justice.

5. Petitioner no.2-Jyotirani Sarangi is concerned, she happens to be the wife of the main a ccused Prashanta Kumar Dash of the Sea Shore Group. At present Prashanta Kumar Dash is in cust ody in a case instituted by the C.B.I. However, the Investigating Officer who was present on the day the matter was heard was not able to assist the learned Addl. Government Advocate to s how enough material to connect petitioner no.2 with the alleged crime. It is stated by the le arned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner nos.2 and 3 happens to be the wife and mo ther of the main accused Prashanta Kumar Dash. It is apparent from the record that they have been implicated in this case as they happened to be the wife and mother of Prashanta Kumar Das h. Moreover, the entire investigation of the case is in the hand of the C.B.I. and is being monitored by the

Honble Supreme Court. If at all any offence has been committed by them, then the matters coul d have been investigated by the C.B.I. As far as petitioner no.4 is concerned, she is a lowe r grade employee of the company having no say in the policy and/or decision making of the comp any. 6. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the benefit of first pro viso to sub-section (1) of Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. should be extended to petitioner nos.2 t o 4. Moreover, petitioner nos..1 and 2 are permanent resident of 205, NA Majestic Apartment, P .S.-Laxmisagar, in the district of Khurdha and petitioner nos.3 and 4 are permanent resident o f village Kunjakanta in the district of Dhenkanal. Hence there is no chance of their abscondin g from justice. There is no allegation on the side of the prosecution that all the petitioners will tamper the prosecution evidence, if they are released on bail. Accordingly, their applic ation for anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of their arrest, they shall be released o n bail by the arresting officer on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by him in the aforesaid case. It is further directed that they shall cooperate with the investigation of the case.

Manoj Kumar Nath v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Nath v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brahmananda Mallick Vs State of Orissa

Pintu@Priyabrata Nayak Vs State of Orissa

Surendra Martha Vs State of Orissa

Trailokya Mishra Vs State of Orissa

Suprava Dash Vs State of Orissa

Rama Chandra Mahanta Vs State of Orissa