Allowed

Sunil Kumar Dash v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC2 Dec 2021ABLAPL/8544/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in an IPC case involving cheating and forgery regarding land sale. Court granted bail subject to specific conditions, finding no risk of absconding or hindering investigation despite prima facie incriminating material.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail by the arresting officer on specified terms and conditions including cooperation with investigation and non-interference with witnesses.

Sunil Kumar Dash Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.8544 of 2021

¶3

Sunil Kumar Dash

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE S. PUJAHARI

Order No.

ORDER 02.12.2021

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶13

The Petitioner apprehending his arrest in 1.C.C. Case No.88 of 2021, registered for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 471, 420, 467, 34 of I.P.C., has filed this petition for his release on pre-arrest bail.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner, the learned counsel for the State so also the Informant having died is substituted by his another son namely Anil Kumar Dash. Mr. Debasis Tripathy, filed power on his behalf.

¶15

It appears that when the father was alive the Petitioner stated to have sold the land showing him to have died and misappropriated the consideration amount. Hence, this case against him.

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

It is stated by the counsel for the Petitioner that the father of the Petitioner in the meanwhile has expired, which was also not disputed as revealed from the fact that he is substituted by his another son. It is further submitted that the part of the consideration amount was transferred, which is seriously disputed by the counsel appearing one of the legal heir of the informant. No doubt primafacie material is available against the Petitioner, who has disposed of the land making a false declaration that the father has died though he was alive, as such there is prima-facie incriminating material against him. But in the meanwhile, the father of the Petitioner has been died. So also the entire material is based on documentary evidence, which has been collected by the police. Nothing is there on record to indicate that the petitioner shall abscond and/ or tamper with the investigation, if release on pre-arrest bail.

¶19

On consideration of the aforesaid facts and submissions made, especially the nature and character of allegations, circumstances in which the offences stated to have been committed and it being not disputed that the Petitioner’s release on pre-arrest bail shall not be an hindrance to a free and fair investigation, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner has made out a case for his release on pre-arrest bail, more particularly when he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and he has no chance of absconding and/or tampering with the prosecution evidence, if released on pre-arrest bail, notwithstanding the vehement objection of the learned counsel for the State and one of the legal heirs of the deceased informant.

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

// 3 //

¶22

Hence, this Court directs that in the event of arrest of the Petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case, he be released on bail by the Officer effecting arrest on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper including the condition that he shall not terrorize any of the witnesses in this case particularly the legal heirs of the deceased informant and shall not indulge himself in any criminal activities and / or tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. Violation of the same shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶23

However, the aforesaid order is subject to the condition that
the Petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and no other
graver offence is reported against the Petitioner besides the aforesaid
offences.
9. The ABLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of being allowed.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(S. Pujahari)
Judge

¶24

SKB

¶25

Page 3 of 3

Sunil Kumar Dash v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Dash v. State of Odisha

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

Debendra Kanta Vs State of Odisha

Parameshwar Panda Vs State of Odisha

Sonu @ Biswajit Bhoi Vs State of Odisha

Samari Korlia Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

Kanhu Charana Das Vs State of Odisha

Rabindra Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha