Abhijit Bharat Gadtia Vs State of Odisha

By filing the present application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the Petitioner seeks to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to challenge order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna in Criminal Revision No.18 of 2024 which arises out of Cyber Crime & Economic Offences, Kalahandi P.S. Case No.10 of 2024.

¶17

By virtue of order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned Revisional Court, the learned Revisional Court has affirmed order dated 29.08.2024 passed in CMC Case No.100 of 2024 by the

¶18

Page 1 of 4.

¶19

learned SDJM, Bhawanipatna. He further submitted that the learned SDJM, Bhwanipatna rejected the application of the Petitioner filed under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C and, accordingly refused to release the property in favour of the Petitioner which was seized in the course of investigation.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the present Petitioner is a victim of cyber fraud and, accordingly, a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- has been taken away from his bank account fraudulently by the accused persons. On the basis of the F.I.R. lodged at the instance of the Petitioner, the Investigating Agency has freezed the bank account of the accused persons.

¶21

On perusal of the affidavit filed by the I.O. it appears that a total sum of Rs.84,92,454/- is still lying in 3 bank accounts which stand in the name of the accused persons. It was also contended by learned counsel for the Petitioner that in the meantime some money has already been released in favour of the some of the victims by securing such amount. He further contended that in the meantime although the investigation is open, however, the Petitioner is ready and willing to secure the amount in the event the same is released in his favour.

¶22

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to the prayer made in the present application. In course of argument, learned counsel for the State supported the orders passed by the learned SDJM, Bhawanipatna which was confirmed by the learned Revisional Court and stated before this Court that they have not committed any illegality in rejecting the application of the Petitioner filed under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. Additionally,

¶23

Page 2 of 4.

¶24

it was contended by the learned counsel for the State that since the investigation is still on and the final charge sheet has not been filed, it would not be proper to release the money, which has been freezed in course of investigation, in favour of the Petitioner. On such ground, learned counsel for the State contended that the application filed at the instance of the Petitioner is devoid of merit and, accordingly, the same should be dismissed.

¶25

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, further keeping in view the affidavit filed by the Inspectorin-Charge, Cyber Crime & Economic Offences, Kalahandi P.S., Bhawanipatna, this Court observes that the Petitioner is a victim of the cyber fraud and, as a result, he had lodged an F.I.R. upon which the investigation is still continuing. The affidavit filed by the I.I.C. reveals that in course of investigation, 3 bank accounts belonging to the accused have already been freezed and in the said bank accounts a total sum of Rs.84,92,454/- is still lying. In para11 of the affidavit it has been specifically mentioned by the I.I.C. that a total sum of Rs.20,00,000/- has been transferred from the bank account of the Petitioner-Victim to the account of the fraudster. Moreover, it has also been observed that it is a nationwide fraud. The fact that the bank accounts of the fraudster have been frozen during the investigation has also been mentioned in such affidavit. It has also been admitted by the I.I.C. that some amount of money has already been released in favour of the beneficiaries of other states as per the direction of the respective courts.

¶26

In view of such development, this Court deems it proper to

¶27

Page 3 of 4.

¶28

dispose of the application by modifying the orders at Annexure-1 and 3 to the extent that the SDJM, Bhawanipatna shall verify the total amount that has been transferred from the account of the Petitioner-Victim and in the event it is found that a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- has already been transferred fraudulently from the account of the Petitioner to the account of the fraudster, and in the absence of any other legal impediment, the learned SDJM, Bhawanipatna shall do well to release the amount that has been transferred from the account of the Petitioner-Victim by securing such amount by adequate securities, as would be decided by the learned trial court, within a period of three weeks from the date of communication of a copy of today’s order. In the event, the amount is released in favour of the Petitioner, the same shall be subject to such other terms and conditions as would be deemed just and proper by the learned trial court.

¶29

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the CRLMC stands disposed of.

¶30

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶31

Anil

¶32

Signature Not Verified Page 4 of 4.

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 16-Oct-2025 12:29:18

Abhijit Bharat Gadtia v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhijit Bharat Gadtia 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

Biranchi Narayan Rath Vs Satya Narayan Behera

Papuni@Papu Kumar Behera@Saroj Vs State of Odisha

Samir Kumara Patra Vs State of Odisha

State of Orissa Vs Sarat Ku.Jena

Ajoy Das Vs D.K.Singh

J.S.Prasad and Co. Vs Uday Sankar Das