Allowed

Sankar Raj P v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Jun 2025BLAPL/4998/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Batch of regular bail applications by persons arrested in a large online investment scam in which a retired employee was defrauded via a WhatsApp trading group and mule bank accounts. Finding specific involvement yet to be established and a preliminary charge sheet filed, the Court granted regular bail to each petitioner with bonds, sureties, cash security or bank guarantees and strict common cond

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to all petitioners on furnishing bail bonds with two sureties, plus cash security or bank guarantees varying per petitioner, subject to common stringent conditions.

Sankar Raj P Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.12332 of 2024

¶2

*R. Riyas Mohammed*	.....	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Prabhu K.N., Bharat Swaroop Sharma, Ansuman Bhuyan, Sujata Das, Kousik Ananda Guru, A.K. Mohanty, G. Pattnaik, R. Moharana.
	-versus-
*State of Odisha*	.....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. –
		Mr. Debasish Nayak, AGA

¶3

BLAPL No.12325 of 2024

¶4

Ramesh ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – M/s. Arijeet Mishra, S.K. Jena, S.Biswal, R.Mahato -versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶5

BLAPL No.12389 of 2024

¶6

Asish Kishorbhai Ramani ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. S. Sudhakar Rao, Senior Advocate along with M/s. Yuvraj Parekh, T.M.Sukasiya, R.K.Jena, Page 1 of 30.

¶7

-versus-

¶8

State of Odisha

¶9

.....

¶10

Opposite Party

¶11

Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶12

BLAPL No.12409 of 2024

¶13

R. Meenachi Sundaram @ ..... Petitioner Meenachisundaram Ramchandran Represented By Adv. – M/s. Sanjibani Mishra, K.A. Guru -versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶14

BLAPL No.12465 of 2024

¶15

Raj Sharma ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – M/s. Sanjibani Mishra, K.A. Guru -versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶16

BLAPL No.12515 of 2024

¶17

R. Lakshmanan ..... Petitioner

¶18

Represented By Adv. – M/s. Amar Kumar Mohanty, K.A. Guru, G. Pattanaik, R. Moharana

¶19

Page 2 of 30.

¶20

-versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶21

BLAPL No.12517 of 2024

¶22

*Kiron Jyothy PK*	.....	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Kousik Ananda
		Guru, A.K. Mohanty,
		R.Moharana
	-versus-
*State of Odisha*	.....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. –
		Mr. Debasish Nayak,
		A.G.A.

¶23

BLAPL No.12548 of 2024

¶24

Sriram Atmaram Mohite ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. S. Sudhakar Rao, Sr. Adv. Along with M/s. Yuvraj Parekh, T.M. Sukyniya, R.K. Jena -versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶25

Page 3 of 30.

¶26

BLAPL No.12641 of 2024

¶27

*Maria Benedict*	..... -versus-	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Suryakanta Jena, A.Goswamy, A.Singh
*State of Odisha*	..... BLAPL No.12642 of 20	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A. 24
*Prakash*	..... -versus-	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Bijaya Kumar Ragada, L.N. Patel, A.Padhi, M.Sahoo, A.Ray
*State of Odisha*	..... BLAPL No.12765 of 20	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A. 24
*Dinesh Babu Vellais* *Dhinesh Babu SV*	*amy @* ..... -versus-	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Rajjet Roy, N.Hota, S.Sourav, T.P.Tripathy
*State of Odisha*	.....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶28

Page 4 of 30.

¶29

BLAPL No.12843 of 2024

¶30

*Mohammed Ali Syed Ibrahim*	..... *Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Pradeep Kumar Mohanty, S.Biswal, P.K. Samal -versus-
*State of Odisha* BLAPL	..... *Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A. No.12865 of 2024
*Ahir Mayur Kumar*	..... *Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Anand Jena, S. Mohapatra -versus-
*State of Odisha* BLAPL	..... *Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A. No.12872 of 2024
*Ashish Dahyabhai Gohil*	..... *Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Soumendra Pattanaik. J.M. Rout -versus-
*State of Odisha*	..... *Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶31

BLAPL No.13017 of 2024

¶32

*Sachin Gautam Gupta* ..... -versus-	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Rabindra Prasad Patnaik, B.C.Patra
*State of Odisha* ..... BLAPL No.13070 of 20	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A. 24
*Vikram Singh Shaktwat* ..... -versus-	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Bijaya Kumar Ragada, L.N.Patel, M.Sahoo, A.Ray, A.Pattnaik, T.D.K.Dora
*State of Odisha* ..... BLAPL No.13160 of 20	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A. 24
*Devram* .....	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Ramesh Agarwal, R.Rajgahria, M.N.Das, A.Bansal, S.Nayak, S.Joshi
-versus-
*State of Odisha* .....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶33

Page 6 of 30.

¶34

BLAPL No.209 of 2025

¶35

*Akshay Kumar Singh* .....	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Rabindra Prasad Patnaik, B.C.Patra
-versus-
*State of Odisha* .....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.
BLAPL No.237 of 2025
*Gurujar Aryan Yogeshbhai* ..... -versus-	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Rabindra Prasad Patnaik, B.K.Garnaik
*State of Odisha* .....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.
BLAPL No.1296 of 2025
*Ramesh* .....	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Bharat Bhusan Routray
-versus-
*State of Odisha* .....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶36

Page 7 of 30.

¶37

BLAPL No.1510 of 2025

¶38

*Aasif Quereshi*	.....	*Petitioner*
*State of Odisha*	-versus- .....	Represented By Adv. – M/s. Arijeet Mishra, S.K.Jena, S.Biswal, R.Mahato, A.K.Muduli *Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.
*Sk Jamir Uddin*	BLAPL No.2887 of 2 ..... -versus-	025 *Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – M/s. Pradeep Kumar Panda, D.K.Mohapatra, P. Nayak
*State of Odisha*	..... BLAPL No.4998 of 2	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A. 025
*Sankar Raj P*	..... -versus-	*Petitioner* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Ashok Kumar Sarangi
*State of Odisha*	.....	*Opposite Party* Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶39

Page 8 of 30.

¶40

CORAM:

¶41

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

09.06.2025

Order No.

1. These matters are taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶46

Initially the Petitioner, namely, Ramesh filed BLAPL No.12325 of 2024 under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for his release on regular bail. Similarly, the Petitioner namely, R. Riyas Mohammed filed BLAPL No.12332 of 2024 for his release on regular bail. Thereafter the connected bail applications which have been mentioned hereinabove were filed by the respective Petitioners for their release on bail.

¶47

On perusal of the order sheet, it appears that the matters were listed before different Benches of this Court. Since the bail application filed by the Petitioner, namely, Ramesh (BLAPL No.12325 of 2024) was the earliest one in the series, the same was listed as the lead matter along with all connected bail applications. Vide order dated 28.03.2025 although the learned coordinate Bench directed the matter to be listed on 9^th April, 2025, however the same could not be taken up on the date fixed.

¶48

While the above was the position, the learned coordinate Bench vide its order dated 17.04.2025 found that some other applications does not belong to the roster of that Bench. Accordingly, on the very same day, an order was passed directing the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court to do the needful for

¶49

Page 9 of 30.

¶50

listing of the matters before the appropriate Bench with kind approval of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

¶51

Being aggrieved by the order dated 17.04.2025, the Petitioner, namely, R. Riyas Mohammed (BLAPL No.12332 of 2024) approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).8231/2025. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 30.05.2025 disposed of the aforesaid appeal with the following observations:-

¶52

“Having regard to the nature of relief claimed, we dispose of the Special Leave Petition with a request to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court to list all these bail applications, including that of the petitioner, on 09.06.2025. We also request the learned Judge before whom these applications will be listed to decide the same expeditiously. It is, however, clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.”

¶53

After disposal of the appeal preferred by the Petitioner-R. Riyas Mohammed (BLAPL No.12332 of 2024), the case records were placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Orissa High Court. The note sheet and order dated 23.04.2025 which have been attached to the case record reveal that the learned D.R. (Judicial) placed the record before the Hon’ble Chief Justice. Along with the note, a copy of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in W.P.(Crl.) No.55/2025 (Shekhar Prasad Mahto @ Shekhar Kushwaha Vs. The Registrar General, Jharkhand High Court & Anr.) was also brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Chief Justice. The order passed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice on 23.04.2025 reveals that all bail applications have been assigned to

¶54

Page 10 of 30.

¶55

this Bench. Learned Deputy Registrar (Judicial) sought for instruction from this Bench by drawing attention of this Court to the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.8231/2025 on 30.05.2025. In obedience to the request made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 30.05.2025, the above noted batch of bail applications have been specially listed before this Bench with the kind approval of the Hon’ble Chief Justice.

¶56

Heard the learned counsels appearing for different Petitioners in the above noted batch of bail applications and Mr. Debasish Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State-Opposite Party. Perused the case diary as well as the materials on record.

¶57

The case of the prosecution as has been narrated in the F.I.R., in a nutshell, is that on 24.08.2024, an F.I.R. was lodged by the Complainant, namely, one Kuntal Majumdar making allegation for commission of offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) & 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 read with Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Accordingly, the Cyber Crime Police Station of C.I.D., Odisha registered F.I.R. No.48 dated 24.08.2024. The Informant, namely, one Kuntal Majumdar has alleged in the written F.I.R. that on 1^st week of July, 2024 he was automatically added in a Whatsapp Group, namely, KOTAK Investment Club by the admin having Mobile No+1(617)2594164. The Informant, taking into consideration the name of the Company, i.e. KOTAK Investment Club, continued in the

¶58

Page 11 of 30.

¶59

Whatsapp Group and took interest in the activities of the group. Thereafter, he contacted the Assistant/Admin, namely, Evelyn Smith with a request to allow him for trading. The above named Evelyn Smith asked for Aadhar Card, Bank Account Number and consequently enrolled the Informant for trading. The Informant has further alleged that the group was having regularly discussions every day at 9 A.M., 2 P.M. and 8 P.M. During the course of such discussion in the group, a recommendation was given to buy a particular stock at 50% discount. He has also alleged when his level of confident increased, he started trading and invested in an I.P.O. of a company, namely, V.L. Infraprojects Limited and, accordingly, he was allotted 2540000 shares at a discounted price of Rs.19.00 as against the base value of Rs.48.00.

¶60

The F.I.R. further reveals that since the allotted numbers of shares were huge, the Informant expressed his inability to purchase such huge quantity of shares to the admin. The admin, on the other hand, informed the Informant that since it is a system generated allocation of shares, they have no control over it. The Informant was further informed that in the event he refuses to buy the allotted shares, his total available fund will be freezed. Accordingly, the Informant with his entire retirement corpus purchased the total allotted share to the tune of Rs.4.82 Crores. The shares so purchased finally opened at Rs.110.00 and the fund of the Informant immediately jumped above Rs.25 crores immediately. When the Informant wanted to withdraw the funds he was informed that before withdrawal the Informant is required to deposit 75% of service fee @ 20% of profit and the total of such

¶61

Page 12 of 30.

¶62

amount is Rs.3.5 Crores. The Informant arranged some money and requested the admin to allow him to withdraw. He was again informed that he can withdraw upto Rs.23 Crores because of some congestion and for that he has to deposit an amount equal to 1% of the withdrawal amount i.e. Rs.23 lakhs. Such amount was immediately deposited by the Informant with a request to permit withdrawal. Thereafter, when the Informant attempted to withdraw the amount, he could not succeed is his attempt and eventually he was removed from the group by the admin and the app that was used by the Informant was deactivated. Finally, the Informant realized that he has been cheated to the tune of Rs.6.28 Crores.

¶63

On the basis of the aforesaid compliant, the C.I.D., C.B., Cyber Crime Police Station registered P.S. Case No.48 of 2024. Accordingly, the investigation was started and in course of such investigation, several persons including the Petitioners in batch of bail applications have been arrested in connection with the present crime.

¶64

Learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners in the respective bail applications, at the outset, contended that the Petitioners are poor and innocent persons who have been falsely implicated in the present case. It was also argued that the real culprit has misused the bank account of the present Petitioners. Learned counsels further argued that the Petitioners who are poor and helpless persons mostly workers, labourers, drivers and students have been used in the present crime without such Petitioners having any knowledge and information with regard to

¶65

Page 13 of 30.

¶66

the crime that has been committed by using them. It was also argued by the learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners that the defrauded amount was initially transferred to the accounts of the Petitioners on the request of their friends and persons known to them on the plea of some urgency. They further submitted that the money which was initially transferred to the bank account of the Petitioners were subsequently retransferred to other accounts on the request of the known persons or friends with whom they had shared their bank details only with the intention to help them out in an emergency situation. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that the Petitioner, who are mostly innocent persons, have been used in the present crime without the Petitioners having any knowledge at all with regard to the crime that has been committed in the present case.

¶67

Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the Petitioners further emphatically argued that most of the Petitioners are poor and uneducated persons. Most of them are working as helpers, labourers, drivers, salesmen etc. and that they have acted in good faith on the request of some persons, who are either known or close to them. It was further contended on behalf of the Petitioners that the Petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and to appear before the court on each and every date fixed in the event they are released on bail by this Court. Learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners further contended that almost all the Petitioners in the connected batch of bail applications were arrested during October and November, 2024 and, as such, they are languishing in jail custody for a period

¶68

Page 14 of 30.

¶69

exceeding six months. It was also submitted that in the meantime the investigation has progressed substantially and a preliminary charge sheet has already been filed. As such, the custodial interrogation of the Petitioners is not required. They further contended that taking into consideration the poor financial condition of most of the Petitioners, there exists no flight risk. On such ground, learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners urged that the Petitioners be released on bail on any stringent terms and conditions as it would be deemed just and proper by this Court.

¶70

Mr. Debasish Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, contended that the gravity and magnitude of the crime that has been alleged in the F.I.R. does not permit the Petitioners to be released on regular bail. Referring to the F.I.R. as well as the documents available in the case diary, learned Additional Government Advocate contended that the alleged fraud is to the tune of Rs.6.28 Crores and a retired employee has been cheated and looted by the accused persons. It was also contended that the nature of crime that has been alleged in the F.I.R. is no less than a cyber-scam and the same is spread over the entire country. Considering the magnitude, the seriousness and the extent of the fraud committed, a Special Task Force has been constituted to investigate the matter. Accordingly, different teams have been sent to different parts of the country to carry on investigation and to arrest the accused persons, who are involved in the present crime. He further strenuously argued that the preliminary investigation prima facie reveals that the root of the present crime

¶71

Page 15 of 30.

¶72

is connected to a bank account in Vietnam. Therefore, the alleged involvement of overseas scamsters in the present cyber fraud cannot be ruled out at this stage. He further submitted that the preliminary investigation further reveals that the amount which has been defrauded has been transferred to different mule account involving the present Petitioners and subsequently the money either has been retransferred or withdrawn from the bank account of the present Petitioners. He further expressed that a part of the defrauded amount has already been sent overseas by using the hawala route. Referring to the seriousness and magnitude of the crime, further indicating that the matter is still under investigation and finally charge sheet has not been filed, learned Additional Government Advocate vehemently objected to the release of the Petitioners on bail.

¶73

On a careful analysis of the factual background of the present case, further on a close scrutiny of the materials collected in course of the investigations which are part of the case diary and upon a careful examination of the preliminary charge sheet placed on record, this Court observes that the offences alleged is a financial scam involving a huge sum of money. However, it prima facie appears that the present Petitioners were used to loot the defrauded amount by alluring them a small portion of the money transferred to their amount as commission. Thus, it appears that the banks account belonging to the Petitioners have been used as mule accounts to syphon of the money belonging to the Informant. It was also observed that in the case of all Petitioners, the money which was initially transferred to their accounts have been

¶74

Page 16 of 30.

¶75

subsequently retransferred to the accounts of other persons. The bank statement of the accounts belonging to the Petitioners reveals that except the present transaction there are no other high value transactions. Although some of the Petitioners are involved in several cases of similar nature, however, the statement of the bank account which has been filed before this Court does not give a clear picture. In any case, it would be pre-mature to come to a definite conclusion that the bank accounts of the Petitioners were used as a mule accounts by the perpetrators of the crime and the specific involvement of each of the Petitioners is yet to be ascertained as no final charge sheet has been filed indicating closure of the investigation.

¶76

Taking into consideration the surrounding facts and circumstances, the materials available on record, further keeping in view the nature of the allegation made against the present Petitioners and further taking note of their incarceration in judicial custody and the fact that the preliminary charge sheet has already been filed in the meantime, this Court is of the considered view that the custodial interrogation of the Petitioners may not be necessary. However, their presence may be required in course of further investigation as well as during the trial.

¶77

In the aforesaid factual backdrop, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioners on regular bail subject to stringent terms and conditions. Since all the bail applications arise out of a single F.I.R. and the nature of the allegations are almost identical against each of the Petitioners, all the above noted bail applications are being allowed in terms of the present order. However, the

¶78

Page 17 of 30.

¶79

conditions shall vary according to their criminal antecedent and the amount of money involved in each of the cases. As such, the conditions subject to which the Petitioners shall be released are ordered separately in the following paragraphs :-

¶80

I. So far as BLAPL No.12332 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-R. Riyas Mohammed shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter;

¶81

II. So far as BLAPL No.12325 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Ramesh shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish cash security of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) before the Court in seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized bank in interest bearing account initially for a period of one year which will be renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of the trial of the case;

¶82

III. So far as BLAPL No.12389 of 2024 is

¶83

Page 18 of 30.

¶84

concerned, the Petitioner-Asish Kishorbhai Ramani shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/(Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish cash security of Rs.99,000/- (Rupees nine thousand) before the Court in seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized bank in interest bearing account initially for a period of one year which will be renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of the trial of the case;

¶85

IV. So far as BLAPL No.12409 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner - R. Meenachi Sundaram @ Meenachisundaram Ramchandran shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.

¶86

Page 19 of 30.

¶87

V. So far as BLAPL No.12465 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Raj Sharma shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶88

VI. So far as BLAPL No.12515 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-R. Lakshmanan shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶89

VII. So far as BLAPL No.12517 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Kiron Jyothy PK shall be

¶90

Page 20 of 30.

¶91

released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.

¶92

VIII. So far as BLAPL No.12548 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Sriram Atmaram Mohite shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/(Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.

¶93

IX. So far as BLAPL No.12641 of 2024 is concerned, The Petitioner-Maria Benedict shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty

¶94

Page 21 of 30.

¶95

thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.

¶96

X. So far as BLAPL No.12642 of 2024 is concerned, The Petitioner-Prakash shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.

¶97

XI. So far as BLAPL No.12765 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Dinesh Babu Vellaisamy@ Dhinesh Babu SV shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the

¶98

Page 22 of 30.

¶99

satisfaction of the court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.

¶100

XII. So far as BLAPL No.12843 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Mohammed Ali Syed Ibrahim shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶101

XIII. So far as BLAPL No.12865 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Ahir Mayur Kumar shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten

¶102

Page 23 of 30.

¶103

lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶104

XIV. So far as BLAPL No.12872 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Ashish Dahyabhai Gohil shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/(Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish cash security of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) before the Court in seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized bank in interest bearing account initially for a period of one year which will be renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of the trial of the case;

¶105

XV. So far as BLAPL No.13017 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Sachin Gautam Gupta shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,70,000/- (Rupees one

¶106

Page 24 of 30.

¶107

lakh seventy thousand) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶108

XVI. So far as BLAPL No.13070 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Vikram Singh Shaktwat shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶109

XVII. So far as BLAPL No.13160 of 2024 is concerned, the Petitioner-Devram shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before

¶110

Page 25 of 30.

¶111

the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶112

XVIII. So far as BLAPL No.209 of 2025 is concerned, the Petitioner-Akshay Kumar Singh shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶113

XIX. So far as BLAPL No.237 of 2025 is concerned, the Petitioner-Gurujar Aryan Yogeshbhai shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish cash security of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) before the Court in seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized bank in interest bearing account initially for a period of one year which will

¶114

Page 26 of 30.

¶115

be renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of the trial of the case;

¶116

XX. So far as BLAPL No.1296 of 2025 is concerned, the Petitioner-Ramesh shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶117

XXI. So far as BLAPL No.1510 of 2025 is concerned, The Petitioner-Aasif Quereshi shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial

¶118

Page 27 of 30.

¶119

court of the case;

¶120

XXII. So far as BLAPL No.2887 of 2025 is concerned, the Petitioner-SK. Jamir Uddin shall be released on bail in C.T.(S) Case No.361 of 2025 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶121

XXIII. So far as BLAPL No.4998 of 2025 is concerned, the Petitioner-Sankar Raj P shall be released on bail in C.T.(S) Case No.361 of 2025 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter before the court below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;

¶122

Furthermore, release of all the above Petitioners in

¶123

Page 28 of 30.

¶124

the above batch of bail applications shall also be subject to the following common conditions:-

¶125

I. While on bail, they shall not indulge in similar criminal activities;

¶126

II. They shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O. as and when their presence is required on an notice being given by the I.O. indicating the specific date and time of the appearance of the Petitioners;

¶127

III. They shall file an affidavit indicating their local addresses, mobile phone numbers, Aadhaar details and any other contact details;

¶128

IV. They shall keep the I.O. informed about their whereabouts and any change in their addresses and mobile numbers at regular intervals of fifteen days from the date of their release from judicial custody;

¶129

V. They shall appear before the trial court on each and every date fixed unless such appearance is dispensed with by the trial court in accordance with law; and

¶130

VI. They shall not leave the country till conclusion of the trial and if they have any travel documents like Passport etc., same shall be surrendered before the trial court at the time of their release on bail and in the event they do not have any travel document, then an

¶131

Page 29 of 30.

¶132

affidavit to the aforesaid extent be filed before the trial court.

¶133

In the event of violation of any of the conditions indicated hereinabove, the trial court is authorized to cancel the bail application of the Petitioners in accordance with law and may proceed to arrest the Petitioners by issuing an arrest warrant.

¶134

The BLAPLs are accordingly disposed of.

¶135

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶136

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Vacation Judge

¶137

Debasis

¶138

Signature Not Verified

¶139

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 10-Jun-2025 14:59:19

¶140

Page 30 of 30.

Sankar Raj P v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankar Raj P 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

P.Rajesh Reddy Vs State of Odisha

Hemant Kumar Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Dambarudhar Mohanta Vs State of Odisha

Ramesh Vs State of Odisha

Aasif Quereshi Vs State of Odisha

Sk Jamir Uddin Vs State of Odisha