Dismissed

Gopal Prasad Behera v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Orissa HC20 Apr 2021ABLAPL/1778/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail petition filed to avoid arrest in a case involving misappropriation of funds from a cooperative society, the court rejected the prayer for pre-arrest bail. The court held that given the gravity of the offence and the death of the confessing co-accused, the petitioner's custodial interrogation was necessary to reveal complicity.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected and the petition is dismissed.

Gopal Prasad Behera Vs State of Odisha(Vig.) — Corruption | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.1778 of 2021

¶3

Gopal Prasad Behera … Petitioner -Versus-

¶4

State of Odisha (Vigilance) … Opp. Party

¶5

CORAM : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.PUJAHARI

¶6

ORDER

¶7

20.04.2021 This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶8

The Petitioner apprehending his arrest in Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No.37 of 2020, corresponding to V.G.R. Case No.24 of 2020, pending in the court of Special Judge, Vigilance, Balasore registered for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the P.C. Act, 1988 and Sections 409/468/471/120(B) of the I.P.C., has filed this petition for his release on pre-arrest bail.

¶9

As it appears that the Petitioner was Secretary of Panapana Service Co-operative Society under Balasore Bhadrak Central Co-operative Bank. In the said society, many of the depositors had deposited their hard earned money. The present Petitioner is responsible for the executive administration of the Society where he was posted as Secretary from 23.06.2011 and continued till 26.11.2018 (till his retirement). One Pradipta Kumar Das, who was posted as

¶10

¶11

Assistant Secretary of the said Society since 25.02.2010 and continued till 23.7.2020 (till his death).

¶12

During the incumbency of the Petitioner and the Pradipta Kumar Das, fraudulently withdrawal of money was made from the accounts of different depositors and Rs.2,46,71,536/- was misappropriated.

¶13

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that since the accused, namely, Pradipta Kumar Das has confessed the guilt before the authority, the Petitioner could not have been prosecuted in the aforesaid case.

¶14

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department, however, vehemently opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the Petitioner with the submission that the allegation against the Petitioner is serious and his custodial interrogation is necessary.

¶15

It cannot be lost sight that the Petitioner was the Secretary of the aforesaid Co-operative Society. As such, prima facie without his complicity, the aforesaid crime could not have been committed by the accused Pradipta Kumar Das, who is already dead. The custodial interrogation of the Petitioner would reveal regarding his complicity and also the manner in which the offence stated to have been committed and regarding involvement of any other persons. The offence under Section 409 of I.P.C. is stringent one and prescribed life imprisonment.

¶16

Hence, considering the aforesaid facts and submissions made, especially the nature and gravity of the accusation,

¶17

¶18

character of incriminating materials appearing against the Petitioner, circumstances in which he has been indicted in this case, coupled with the fact that his custodial interrogation is likely to throw more light in the investigation in the absence of the co-accused, who has already dead, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner in this case does not deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶19

Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the Petitioner stands rejected and the ABLAPL is disposed of being dismissed.

¶20

As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020.

¶21

…………………….. S.Pujahari, J.

¶22

Gopal Prasad Behera v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Prasad Behera v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

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

Biswanath Mohalik Vs State of Odisha

Santilata Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Sanjay Kumar Dalei Vs State of Odisha

Raju Dey Vs State of Odisha

Asit Ranjan Mohanty @ Silu Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Saroj Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha