Allowed

Mohan Mondal v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Orissa HC15 May 2025BLAPL/4962/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted bail to a government servant accused of corruption and cheating in a Vigilance case. The court noted the petitioner was already on bail in a connected case, no custodial interrogation was needed, and he was unlikely to abscond or tamper with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with two local solvent sureties of like amount, subject to cooperation with investigation and non-interference with evidence.

Mohan Mondal Vs State of Odisha(Vig.) — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.4962 of 2025

¶3

Mohan Mondal

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Dipti Ranjan Bhokta, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha (Vig.) …. Opp. Party

¶8

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Das, Standing Counsel (Vigilance)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

ORDER

Order No.

15.05.2025

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

¶15

Heard Mr. D.R. Bhokta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.K. Das, learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department.

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Designation: Senior StenographerReason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 16-May-2025 17:23:18

¶18

This is an application for bail under section 483 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 in connection with Koraput Vigilance P.S. Case No.11 of 2025 corresponding to V.G.R. Case No.09 of 2025 pending before the learned court of the Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Vigilance, Jeypore for alleged commission of offences under sections 13(2) read with section 13(a)(1) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 read with sections 409/201/120-B of the

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

Indian Penal Code.

¶21

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge -cumSpecial Judge, Vigilance, Jeypore vide order dated 18.03.2025.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was the Asst. Agriculture Engineer in the office of P.D., Watershed, Malkangiri and a DA case was instituted against the petitioner vide Koaput Vigilance P.S. Case No.2 of 2025 in which he was taken into judicial custody on 17.02.2025 and he has been directed to be released on bail by this Court in BLAPL No.2527 of 2025 vide order dated 29.04.2025. He has filed a copy of the said order in Court, which is taken on record. He further submits that after the petitioner was taken into custody in connection with that DA case, the present case has been instituted in which accusations for misappropriation of Government money of Rs.18,49,806/- (rupees eighteen lakhs forty nine thousand eight hundred six) in connection with plantation programme has been made. He further submits that there is no chance of absconding of the petitioner since he is a Government servant so also tampering with the evidence and most of the evidence are documentary and, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

¶23

Learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance has produced the written instruction dated 13.05.2025

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

received from the D.S.P. of Police, Vigilance, Malkangiri Unit in which it is stated that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this case. The written instruction produced in Court today is taken on record.

¶26

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and the petitioner was taken on remand in this case and the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody and that the petitioner is a Government servant, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶27

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/(rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with further conditions as the learned Court below may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall not tamper with the evidence.

¶28

Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶29

The BLAPL is disposed of accordingly.

¶30

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules

¶31

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

¶32

sipun

¶33

Page 3 of 3

Mohan Mondal v. State of Odisha(Vig.)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Mondal 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

Deepak Badatiya Vs State of Odisha

Anil Kumar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Vidhayanand Kumar @ Ramanath Vs State of Odisha

Sipu Barik Vs State of Odisha

Prakash Jhankar Vs State of Odisha

Balaram Rout Vs State of Odisha