Allowed

Manoj Kumar Pattanaik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 Jul 2024BLAPL/3204/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second bail application for offences of cheating arising from a builder failing to deliver a flat. With charge sheet filed but trial not commenced and the petitioner in custody, the court admitted him to bail with conditions including property surety.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail: unencumbered property surety of Rs.10,00,000/- plus bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties, subject to stated conditions.

Manoj Kumar Pattanaik Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 3204 of 2024

¶2

Manoj Kumar Pattanaik

¶3

Petitioner

¶4

Mr. S.C. Mohapatra, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. S. Mohapatra, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

… Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. K.K. Gaya, ASC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

¶10

ORDER(ORAL)

¶11

16.07.2024 I.A. No. 622 of 2024

¶12

Order No.

¶13

06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. On the prayer of Mr. Soura Chandra Mohapatra, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the I.A. stands disposed of as not pressed.

¶14

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶15

BLAPL No. 3204 of 2024

¶16

07.

¶17

This is the second bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Colliery P.S. Case No. 124 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. Case No.505 of 2019 pending in the file of learned JMFC (CT), Talcher for commission of offences

¶18

Page 1 of 6

¶19

punishable under Sections 420/34 of IPC, on the allegation that he being the builder has cheated the Informant for a sum of Rs.53,70,000/- by not providing the flat which was provided to some other persons at a higher rate.

¶20

Mr. Soura Chandra Mohapatra, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner to this Court, but no bail application of the petitioner is pending before any other forum.

¶21

Heard Mr. Soura Chandra Mohapatra, learned Sr. counsel appearing along with Mr. S. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.K. Gaya, learned ASC in the matter and perused the record. Mr. Soura Chandra Mohapatra submits that against the refusal of bail to the petitioner in BLAPL No.12781 of 2023, he has not approached the Apex Court, although he has approached the Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal(Crl.) No.6004 of 2024 against refusal of bail to him in BLAPL No. 14326/2023 which was passed by this Court on 08.02.2024.

¶22

It is not disputed that against the rejection of the bail to the petitioner in BLAPL No.14326 of 2023, the petitioner has approached the Apex Court and secured bail, but fundamentally the allegation appearing against the petitioner in that case as well as in the present case is more or less the same. It is

¶23

Page 2 of 6

¶24

also not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since 26.11.2022, but subsequently remanded in this case on 18.09.2023 and in the meanwhile, charge sheet has already been submitted in this case, however, as per the report of the learned J.M.F.C.(CT), Talcher, the trial in this case has not yet commenced and even charge has not yet been framed as the petitioner is facing trial in OPID Court, Cuttack. In such situation, it is quite natural that when the trial would commence would obviously a guess and when it would be concluded is uncertain. No doubt there is prima facie case against the petitioner for the offence of cheating, but since the trial has not yet commenced and the petitioner has a fundamental right to speedy trial, this Court considers that the petitioner deserves to be admitted to bail since he cannot be detained in custody for an indefinite period without assurance of speedy trial.

¶25

In view of the above facts and taking into consideration the custody of the petitioner and there being no chance of prospect of immediate trial in this case for the reasons stated hereinabove, this Court admits the petitioner to bail.

¶26

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing an unencumbered property surety of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) only, in

¶27

Page 3 of 6

¶28

addition to bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees One Lakh)only with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case, on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-

¶29

(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

¶30

(ii) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance are dispensed with. 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.229-A of IPC in accordance with law,

¶31

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by giving his present address of stay,

¶32

(iv) the petitioner shall inform the Court as well as the concerned police station as to his place(s) of residence during the trial by providing his mobile number(s), residential address, e-mail I.D, if any, and other documents in support of proof of his residence. The petitioner shall not change his address of residence without intimating to the Court and concerned police station,

¶33

(v) in case the petitioner misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence, proclamation U/S.82 of Cr.P.C. is issued and the petitioner fails to appear

¶34

Page 4 of 6

¶35

before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the learned trial Court is at liberty to initiate proceeding against him for offence U/S.174-A of the IPC in accordance with law,

¶36

(vi) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station as and when required,

¶37

(vii) the petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, in the Court in seisin of the case till conclusion of trial, unless he is permitted to take back such passport to use for specific purpose during the pendency of the case and in case, the petitioner is not having any passport, he shall file an affidavit before the trial Court indicating the same and

¶38

(viii) the petitioner shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a fortnight preferably on second Sunday of each month in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for six(06) months from the actual date of release from the custody.

¶39

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

¶40

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for similar type of offences on

¶41

Page 5 of 6

¶42

prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

¶43

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶44

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per

¶45

Rules.

¶46

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶47

S. Sasmal

¶48

Signature Not Verified

¶49

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 18-Jul-2024 13:23:50

¶50

Page 6 of 6

Manoj Kumar Pattanaik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Pattanaik 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

Somanath Das Vs State of Odisha

Raja Nayak @ Babu Vs State of Odisha

Biswas Naik Vs State of Odisha

Sonu Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Bhupendra@Gupendra Nag Vs State of Odisha

Dibya Singh Pujari Vs State of Odisha