Subhrajeet Barik Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2026)

Subhrajeet Barik Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both petitioners directed to be released/enlarged on bail by the learned Court in seisin over Chamakhandi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2026 on terms and conditions it deems just and proper, subject to additional conditions: (i) not to leave the trial Court's jurisdiction till disposal of trial; (ii) to appear before the trial Court on each posting date; (iii) not to tamper with evidence; (iv) not to commit any offence while on bail; (v) release subject to verification of similar-type antecedents; the bail concession is withdrawable upon re-indulgence in similar crime and cancellable on the prosecution's application for breach of any condition even once.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, accused in Chamakhandi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2026 / G.R. Case No. 211 of 2026 for offences punishable under Sections 318(2)/336(3)/340(2)/3(5) of BNS read with Sections 65/72 of the IT Act, ought to be enlarged on bail under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 after rejection of their bail application by the learned Court below on 02.03.2026.

Court's answer

Regard being had to the nature of the allegation, the period of custody since 22.02.2026, and that both petitioners are young engineering students, the Court inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail, particularly because the charge sheet has already been filed and the entire case is based on documentary evidence.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioners were directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter, on such terms and conditions as that Court deems just and proper, subject to additional conditions including: (i) not leaving the jurisdiction of the trial Court till disposal of the trial; (ii) appearing before the trial Court on each date the case is posted; (iii) not tampering with the evidence; (iv) not committing any offence while on bail; and (v) release subject to verification of similar type of antecedents.

Key takeaways

The concession of bail granted to the petitioners shall stand withdrawn if it is found that they are again indulging in such crime in future.ratio¶44
If the petitioners violate any bail condition imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move an appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail; the trial Court should decide such an application on its own merit.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (SIBO SANKAR MISHRA, J.), Order dated 14.05.2026 — BLAPL No.2348 of 2026 (Subhrajeet Barik) and BLAPL No. 2354 of 2026 (Biswaranjan Gahan) v. State of Odisha — Petitioners, engineering students aged 20 and 21 years with no criminal antecedents (disclosed on comprehensive affidavit), are accused in Chamakhandi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2026 / G.R. Case No. 211 of 2026 (SDJM, Chhatrapur) for offences punishable under Sections 318(2)/336(3)/340(2)/3(5) of BNS read with Sections 65/72 of IT Act, arising from an alleged 'mule account'/Telegram-channel OTP-routing arrangement (SIM of the IOB Narendrapur account in the possession of co-accused Subhrajeet Barik; third-party app auto-reading OTPs; alleged credits of Rs. 72,97,146/- and Rs. 1,16,949/-). Their bail application was rejected below on 02.03.2026; in custody since 22.02.2026; charge sheet filed on 20.04.2026; case based on documentary evidence. Petitions under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 allowed: release directed on terms the learned Court in seisin deems just and proper, with additional conditions — not to leave the trial Court's jurisdiction till disposal of trial, appearance on each trial date, no tampering with evidence, no fresh offence, and release subject to verification of similar-type antecedents. Concession of bail expressly withdrawable if the petitioners again indulge in such crime, and cancellable on the prosecution's application for breach of any condition even on a single occasion, such application to be decided by the trial Court on its own merit.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

BLAPL No.2348 of 2026 &

BLAPL No. 2354 of 2026

BLAPL No. 2348 of 2026 Subhrajeet Barik …. Petitioner(s) Mr. S.C. Mohapatra, Senior Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opp. Party(s)

Mr. P.S. Nayak, AGA

BLAPL No. 2354 of 2026 Biswaranjan Gahan

…. Petitioner(s)

Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opp. Party(s)

Mr. P.S. Nayak, AGA

CORAM:

JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order No.

ORDER

14.05.2026

The petitioners are accused in connection with Chamakhandi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 211 of 2026 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections

Page 1 of 6

318(2)/336(3)/340(2)/3(5) of BNS read with Sections 65/72 of IT Act, pending in the court of the learned SDJM, Chhatrapur.

The petitioners had approached the learned Court below praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 02.03.2026 has rejected the bail application of the petitioners. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 praying for enlargement on bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction from the petitioners, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioners is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R.

The prosecution case as per the FIR is that on 16.02.2026 the S.I. of Police Avijit Samal of Chamakhandi P.S. received information from SP, Ganjam about mule accounts having account number of account holders namely Biswaranjan Gahan, Sashibhusan Das, Sushanta Kumar Pattnayak, Surya Kanta Barik and Pradeep Kumar Gouda. The above named account holders operated in different banks under Chamakhandi PS jurisdiction, for which they made G.D. entries and sent requisition to the respective Branch Managers of the concerned banks for furnishing bank transaction details for a period of one year. Then, he verified the transaction history of the above noted account holders. During verification of suspicious bank accounts received through reliable sources, one bank account bearing A/C No. 70202000001193 maintained at Indian Oversease Bank,

Page 2 of 6

Narendrapur Branch was found suspicious in nature. The said account stands in the name of the Biswaranjan Gahan. Upon verification of KYC documents and transaction details of the said account, it is found that the said account was opened on 28.10.2025 and as per the KYC form the date of birth of the account holder is recorded as 2006 making him about 20 years of age, the mobile number furnished in the KYC form was found to be invalid/non-functional, the address mentioned in KYC form does not match with the address reflected in the Aadhaar Card, within a short span of 10 to 11 days, a total amount of Rs. 72,97,146/- was credited and Rs. 72,50,950/- was debited from the said account, another linked bank account bearing A/c No. 379601000011696 in the name of the Biswaranjan Gahan was found maintained at IOB, Bhubaneswar at Pritipur Branch, the said linked account was opened on 12.12.2025 and the last transaction was recorded on 14.01.2026 and within a short span a total amount of Rs. 1,16,949/- was credited and Rs.1,09,627/- was debited from the account and the existence of multiple accounts in different branches with similar suspicious transaction patterns further strengthens the suspicion of organized and coordinated financial transactions for unlawful gain. The accused-Subhrajeet Barik has been implicated on the basis of the statement of the accused-Biswaranjan Gahan who told his name that Subhrajeet Barik has suggested him to open a bank account for getting Rs.15,000/- in return. However, out of friendship during gossiping he has given a casual information in regard to opening of bank account in his name and give details against which he will be getting Rs.15,000/-. Hence, this Case.

Page 3 of 6

Vide orders dated 30.04.2026 and 12.05.2026, the State Counsel was directed to obtain the C.D. Perusal of the C.D. revealed as under:-

“I may note here that the SIM card registered with the IB, Narendrapur Account bearing A/C No.70202000001193 was in possession of co-accused Subhrajeet Barik and was being used in the seized Android mobile phone having IMEI No. 860902055163477 (IMEI-1) and 860902055163485 (IMEI-2). During investigation, it was ascertained that Subhrajeet Barik had installed a third party application on the said mobile phone through a link provided by a Telegram channel operator. Subhrajeet Barik had joined the said Telegram channel, which assured payment of fixed amount of money in exchange for providing bank account details and the corresponding merchant QR code. As per the arrangement, whenever the Telegram channel operator intended to transfer funds to another bank account, an OTP would be generated and received on the above mentioned Android mobile phone. The installed third party application was configured to automatically read the OTP message and facilitate the transfer of the specified amount to the intended beneficiary account. Since the Telegram channel operator did not have physical possession of the SIM card, it is presumed that he was accessing the internet banking facility of the said account using the login ID and password credentials. Access to internet banking requires an IP address; therefore, it is necessary to obtain the IP address used by the operator to access the internet banking account in order to ascertain the corresponding physical locations linked to those IP addresses.”

The petitioners have also filed comprehensive affidavit disclosing that they do not have any criminal antecedents and both the petitioners are pursuing their engineering course in different colleges.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody since 22.02.2026 and charge sheet

Page 4 of 6

in the present case has been filed on 20.04.2026. Both the petitioners are 20 and 21 years of age and they are pursuing their engineering course in different colleges

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submits that in the event the petitioners are released on bail, they may repeat the same crime.

Regard being had to the nature of allegation, period of custody since 22.02.2026 and since both the petitioners are young engineering students, I am inclined to enlarge the accused-Petitioners on bail particularly for the fact that charge sheet has already been filed and the entire case is based on documentary evidence.

Hence, the Petitioners are directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions:

(i) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till the disposal of the trial;

(ii) They shall appear before the trial Court on each date on which the case is posted for trial;

(iii) They shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever;

(iv) They shall not commit any offence while on bail, and

(v) They shall be released on bail subject to verification of similar type of antecedents. It is made clear that the concession of bail granted to petitioners shall be withdrawn if it’s found that they are again indulging in such crime in future.

Page 5 of 6

In the event, the petitioners are found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Judge

Ashok

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 14-May-2026 19:40:25

Page 6 of 6