Allowed

Laxmi Narayan Das v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC7 Nov 2024BLAPL/5798/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed two bail applications filed by petitioners accused of financial fraud and cheating offences. Despite charges involving IPC 1860 sections and open investigation, the court granted bail via Security Tender Deposit Receipt (S.T.D.R.) and sureties, citing prisoner's custody duration and lack of need for further interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,00,000/- with two solvent sureties each and specific conditions including S.T.D.R. payment of Rs.3,00,000/- by one petitioner.

Laxmi Narayan Das Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL Nos.5798 & 5813 of 2024

¶2

(Applications for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973)

¶3

In BLAPL No.5798 of 2024 Laxmi Narayan Das …. Petitioner -versus…. State of Odisha Opposite Party For Petitioner - Mr.A. Tripathy, Advocate. Mr. A. K. Jena, Advocate. For Opposite Party - Mr. T.K.Acharya, ASC In BLAPL No.5813 of 2024 Ramesh Chandra Padhi …. Petitioner -versus…. State of Odisha Opposite Party For Petitioner - Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate. Mr. A. K. Jena, Advocate. For Opposite Party - Mr. T. K. Acharya, ASC

¶4

CORAM: MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA

¶5

Date of Hearing :05.11.2024 :: Date of Order :07.11.2024

¶6

A.C. Behera, J . Since both the bail applications have arisen out

¶7

of one case vide C.T. Case No.565 of 2024 in connection with Soro P.S. Case No.360 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Soro,

¶8

Page 1 of 7

¶9

¶10

Balasore, then both the bail applications have been taken up together analogously for their final disposal through this common order.

¶11

The petitioners are in jail custody having been implicated with the offences under Sections 417, 419, 420, 467, 468, 294, 506 & 120-B of the IPC, 1860 on the allegations alleged against them that, they (petitioners) being associated with another have taken away huge amount of money from the informant and his friends named in the F.I.R. cheating them each for Rs.4,00,000/- (rupees four lakhs) giving them false promise for providing him employments in Balasore Bhadrak Central Cooperative Bank (BBCC) since the year 2019 till 2024 in different phases and accordingly, the petitioners have defrauded the informant and his friends.

¶12

When the above fraud of the petitioners came to the knowledge of the informant and his friends, then, the informant lodged F.I.R. on dated 24.04.2024 before the I.I.C., Soro P.S. alleging the aforesaid allegations against the petitioners along with others.

¶13

Basing upon such F.I.R. lodged by the informant, the case vide Soro P.S. No.360 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 417, 467, 468, 294, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC, 1860 was registered against the petitioners and investigation was started.

¶14

During investigation, the petitioner (Laxmi Narayan Das) was arrested on dated 26.04.2024 and was forwarded to the Court.

¶15

The petitioner (Ramesh Chandra Padhi) was brought on remand to this case from Soro P.S. Case No.292 of 2024. Accordingly, both the petitioners are in jail custody.

¶16

After completion of the investigation of the case against the petitioners, the Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet on dated

¶17

Page 2 of 7

¶18

¶19

14.06.2024 under Sections 419, 420, 417, 467, 468, 294, 506 & 120-B of the IPC, 1860 against the petitioners keeping the investigation open under Section 173 (8) of the Cr.P.C, 1973 stating that, the co-accused of the petitioners, who is the son of Laxmi Narayan Das i.e. Bhabani Shankar Das is yet to be arrested.

¶20

I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted for consideration of bail of the petitioners liberally contending that, the investigation of the case has already been completed due to submission of the charge-sheet and there is less of chance of absconding of the petitioners during the trial of the case and the petitioner-Ramesh Chandra Padhi is agreed for depositing of Rs.3,00,000/- (rupess three lakh) as security for releasing them on bail, to which, the learned Additional Standing Counsel vehemently objected contending that, when the investigation of the case has been kept open and one co-accused of the petitioners has not been arrested as yet and when the petitioners have cheated the informant and his friends by giving them assurance falsely for providing employments, then in this nature of economic allegations against the petitioners, they should not be allowed to go on bail.

¶22

It appears from the investigation papers that, when the informant and his friends approached to Soro and Khaira Police personnels, then, the petitioners had given them three cheques for Rs.13,00,000/-, but the said cheques issued by the petitioners have been dishonoured, for which, the case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is subjudice against the petitioner, however, the informant and his friends have got back Rs.4,00,000/(rupees four lakhs) from the petitioners, but, the rest amount paid by them

¶23

Page 3 of 7

¶24

¶25

to the petitioners has not been returned back to them (informant and his friends).

¶26

When the presence of the petitioners in custody before the Investigating Officer for further investigation of the case may not be required due to completion of the investigation of the case against them (petitioners) during their staying inside the jail for more than 6 months and when the trial of the case against the petitioners has not been commenced inspite of submission of the charge-sheet against them (petitioners) since 14.06.2024 due to keeping up of the investigation open for further investigation and when, all the offences alleged against the petitioners are magisterial triable in nature and when the Investigating Agency has not come forward with a case for the requirements of the petitioners for their any further custodial interrogation and when the petitioners are local persons having their permanent houses & homesteads under the jurisdiction of Khaira and Soro Police Stations respectively and when there is no material in the record to show that, the presence of the petitioners during the trial of the case cannot be secured in case of their release on bail or they shall tamper with the prosecution evidence and when nothing appears from the record to show that, during the staying of the petitioners inside the jail, they (petitioners) have avoided to cooperate with the investigation and when there is no certainty, when the trial of the case against them (petitioners) shall be completed and when the main purpose/object of the bail is to secure the appearance of the accused persons at the trial, then at this juncture, by applying the principles of law relating to the bail enunciated in like nature economical offences related cases by the Apex Court reported in 2011 (4) Crimes 323 (SC): Sanjay Chandra Vrs. C.B.I. and 2024 (4) Crimes-41 (S.C.): V. Senthil Balaji

¶27

Page 4 of 7

¶28

¶29

Vrs. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement , it is felt proper to allow the petitioners to go on bail pending the trial of the case against them with stringent conditions looking to the interest of the informant, victims, witnesses and prosecution, because the keeping up of the investigation open only by the Investigating Agency after submission of the charge-sheet on dated 14.06.2024 cannot be taken as an instrument in the hands of the police/prosecution for detention of the petitioners inside the jail for an indefinite long period, when there is no possibility of completion of trial of the case against the petitioners within a reasonable time.

¶30

Therefore, both the bail applications filed by the petitioners are allowed.

¶31

They (petitioners) are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,00,000/- (rupees five lakh) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter on the following conditions i.e.:-

¶32

(i) they (petitioners) shall cooperate with the further investigation of the case by remaining present in the places as and when directed by the Investigating Officer.

¶33

(ii) they shall not directly and indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts or any witnesses of the case in any manner or shall not make any attempt to influence them in any manner so as to dissuading them from disclosing such facts before the Court or any other Authority including the Investigating Agency.

¶34

Page 5 of 7

¶35

¶36

(iii) they shall remain present personally before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case.

¶37

(iv) they shall surrender their respective passports, if any, (if not already surrendered) before the Court in seisin over the matter and in case, they are not the holder of the same, they shall swear affidavits for the same. If they have already surrendered their respective passports before the learned Court, then that fact should also be supported by affidavits.

¶38

(v) Out of two petitioners, the petitioner (Ramesh Chandra Padhi in BLAPL No.5813 of 2024) shall furnish cash security to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- (rupees three lakh) only in the shape of S.T.D.R. obtained from any Nationalized Bank initially for a period of 6 months renewable from time to time till final disposal of the case with an undertaking by him (Ramesh Chandra Padhi) that, the payment of the matured amount as against the S.T.D.R. shall be subject to any order passed under BNSS, 2023 including an order under Section 395 of the BNSS, 2023 by the Trial Court; but in case of violation of any one of the aforesaid conditions by the petitioners, learned Court in seisin over the matter is authorized to cancel their respective bail orders outrightly without seeking any permission from this Court for the same.

¶39

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

¶40

Page 6 of 7

¶41

¶42

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

¶43

(A.C. Behera), Judge.

¶44

Orissa High Court, Cuttack. 07.11.2024//Utkalika Nayak// Junior Stenographer

¶45

Signature Not Verified

¶46

Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Nov-2024 11:07:50

¶47

Page 7 of 7

Laxmi Narayan Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmi Narayan Das 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayanarayan Sethi Vs Radha Gobinda Das

Rupak Digal Vs State of Odisha

Hemanta Podh Vs State of Odisha

Nilakantha Vs State

Raj @ Sk. Gulam Rasul Vs State of Odisha

Ramesh Chandra Padhi Vs State of Odisha