Debasis Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Since, both the bail applications under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 have arisen out of one case vide C.T. Case No.2130 of 2023 in connection with Cyber Crime (CID), Cuttack P.S. Case No.35 of 2023, then both the bail applications are taken up together analogously for their final disposal through this common order.

¶19

Page 1 of 5

¶20

I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State.

¶21

It is the case of the prosecution that, the informant on being allured by the petitioners and their co-accuseds for his part time job as flight ticket booking agent in order to get some extra income, he (informant) was added to a Telegram Group, namely, Esky Tem2221 with the petitioners and their accuseds and then, the informant was asked to recharge Rs.10,500/- to get his flight booking task and accordingly, the informant recharged with Rs.10,500/- and booked some flight tickets and get commission through online. Thereafter, he(informant) was asked to deposit Rs.20,672/- in order to get 5 X commission and he(informant) deposited the same in ICICI Bank Account No.019005007497 and then asked to deposit Rs.10,500/- in ICICI Bank Account No.0018502054 and again deposited Rs.52,257.97 Paise and then, deposited Rs.52,258/- and in such process, the informant’s balance in his account showed as Rs.28,79,703/- in total containing his above deposited amount plus his 5 X commission as an agent towards flight tickets bookings, but, when he(informant) tried to withdraw such amount, he was asked by the petitioners and their co-accused to deposit 50% for withdrawal of that amount and accordingly, the petitioners and their co-accuseds have cheated the informant for Rs.31,10,139/- in total.

¶22

During investigation, it was found that, the informant has transferred Rs.1,25,327/- to the account No.0452202100000538 of the petitioner Debasis Sahoo. Accordingly, the petitioners being associated with their co-accuseds have committed online fraud.

¶23

When, the informant came to know that, he has been cheated through online fraud, then, he lodged the F.I.R. on 22.12.2023.

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

On the basis of which, the case was registered and the investigation was started.

¶26

During investigation, the petitioner Sushanta Kumar Behera was arrested on 22.04.2024 and then, the petitioner Debashish Sahoo was arrested on 29.01.2024 and they both were forwarded to the court on the date of their respective arrests after being booked with the aforesaid offences and since then, they (petitioners) are in jail custody.

¶27

It is forthcoming from the charge-sheet submitted on dated 24.05.2024 by the Investigating Officer against the petitioners that, out of the alleged misappropriated amount, i.e., Rs.31,10,139/-, the informant has transferred in cash Rs.10,500/-, 20,672, 10,500/-, 52,257.97 Paise and 52,258/- respectively in total Rs.1,47,317.97 Paise and the rest amount, i.e., Rs.29,62,822.97, to which, the informant could have got towards his commission as flight booking agent.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted for liberal consideration of their bail contending that, the investigation of the case has already been completed during the staying of the petitioners inside the jail and the petitioners have not taken any money of the informant.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner-Debasis Sahoo submitted that, the petitioner-Debasis Sahoo is interested to deposit Rs.1,25,000/-(rupees one lakh twenty-five thousand) as security for his bail, because it has been alleged in the charge-sheet that, there was transaction of Rs.01,25,327/- through his account.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner Sushanta Kumar Behera is interested to deposit Rs.50,000/- as security for his bail, as he has

¶31

Page 3 of 5

¶32

been charge-sheeted in the case. To which, learned Additional Government Advocate vehemently opposed contending that, in these nature of economic offence, they(petitioners) should not be allowed to go on bail.

¶33

When during the staying of the petitioners inside the jail, the investigation of the case has already been completed and when the presence of the petitioners before the investigating officer for the purpose of any further investigation may not be required and when the petitioner-Susant Kumar Behera in BLAPL No.7178 of 2024 is interested to deposit of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) and the petitioner-Debasis Sahoo in BLAPL No.3826 of 2024 is interested to deposit of Rs.1,25,000/- (rupees one lakh twenty five thousand) as security for their release on bail, then, at this juncture, by taking the above factors into account, it is felt proper to allow the petitioners to go on bail with stringent conditions.

¶34

11. Hence, both the bail applications filed by the petitioners are allowed

¶35

They (petitioners) are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the case with conditions that :-

¶36

(i) They (petitioners) shall not involve with similar nature of crime in future.

¶37

(ii) They (petitioners) shall appear before the court personally on each date of adjournment of the case till its conclusion.

¶38

(iii) They (petitioners) shall not terrorize, coerce, influence or threat to any witnesses of the prosecution either directly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever at any stage of the trial of the case,

¶39

(iv) The petitioner-Susant Kumar Behera in BLAPL

¶40

Page 4 of 5

¶41

No.7178 of 2024 shall furnish cash security to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) and the petitioner- Debasis Sahoo in BLAPL No.3826 of 2024 shall furnish cash security to the tune of Rs.1,25,000/(rupees one lakh twenty five thousand) only in the shape of STDRs obtained from any nationalized bank initially for a period of 6 months, renewable from time to time till final disposal of both the cases with undertakings by the respective petitioners that, the payments of the matured amount as against the STDRs according to their respective deposits shall be subject to any orders passed under the BNSS, 2023 including under Section 395 of the BNSS, 2023 by the learned Trial Court,

¶42

but, in case of their failure to comply any one of the aforesaid conditions, the learned trial court is authorized to cancel their respective bail orders outrightly without seeking any permission for the same from this Court.

¶43

Accordingly, both the bail applications filed by the petitioners are disposed of finally.

¶44

Grant certified copy of this order to the petitioners on their proper applications.

¶45

Rati Ranjan/Jagabandhu

¶46

Signature Not Verified

¶47

Digitally Signed Signed by: RATI RANJAN NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cutt ack, India. Date: 06-Dec-2024 15:08:50

¶48

Page 5 of 5

Debasis Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Debasis Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bichu Vs Chora

Pramod Kumar Naik Vs State of Odisha

Suryakanta Naik Vs State of Odisha

Gopal Vs Agadhu

Durga Madhab Ekka Vs State of Odisha

Papu@Bhimasen Baral Vs State of Odisha