Allowed

Prassana @ Prashan Kumar Patro v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Sept 2026BLAPL/7690/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa, through Justice G. Satapathy, allowed a bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS. The petitioner, accused of conspiring with his daughter to defraud a bank, was admitted to bail admitting that his daughter (the principal accused) had already been granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to bail on furnishing surety bonds of Rs. 5,00,000/- with two solvent sureties.

Prassana @ Prashan Kumar Patro Vs State of Odisha — Banking and Recovery | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.7690 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010554342026

¶2

(In the matter of application under Section 483 of the BNSS).

¶3

Prassana @ Prashan Kumar … Petitioner Patro

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha … Opposite Party For Petitioner : Mr. B.P. Panda, Advocate For Opposite Party : Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

¶8

DATE OF HEARING & DATE OF JUDGMENT:10.09.2026 (ORAL)

¶9

G. Satapathy, J.

¶10

1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with EOW, Bhubaneswar PS Case No.16 of 2018 corresponding to GR Case No.639 of 2018 pending in the Court of learned Presiding Officer, designated Court under OPID Act-cum-Addl. Sessions Judge, Berhampur, Ganjam for commission of offences punishable under Sections 409/420/467/468/471/472/34 of IPC.

¶11

2. The background facts in gist are that one Amrita Priyadarshini Patro, the daughter of the present petitioner was

¶12

BLAPL No.7690 of 2026 Page 1 of 4

¶13

working as a Bank Manager of Union Bank of India, Koraput Branch, Koraput and during 17.10.2016 to 27.11.2017, the said Amrita Priyadarshini Patro was found to have committed illegalities in sanctioning and disbursing loans to different persons incuding her relatives violating the Bank guidelines and in the process, defrauded the Bank for a sum of Rs.2,05,50,000/- by entering into conspiracy with the present petitioner and her other relatives. Accordingly, EOW PS Case No.16 of 2018 was registered against the petitioner and other accused persons including the principal accused Amrita Priyadarshini Patro for commission of offence punishable U/S.409/420/467/ 468/ 471/ 472/34 of IPC on the report of the Regional Manager, Union Bank of India, Sambalpur.

¶14

2.1. In the course of investigation, it was learnt that the principal accused Amrita Priyadarshini Patro in connivance with the present petitioner sanctioned a loan of Rs.35,00,000/- in favor of her mother Pankajini Patro and sister Pranaya Purnamasi Patro and the said amount was disbursed phase wise to the savings Account No.3913022010006081 standing in the name of the present petitioner. Accordingly, after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner and others, but finding the prima facie materials against the

¶15

BLAPL No.7690 of 2026 Page 2 of 4

¶16

present petitioner, he was taken into custody and he is before this Court in this bail application, when he failed to secure his liberty before the learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act, Berhampur, Ganjam.

¶17

3. Heard Mr. Beda Prakash Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record.

¶18

4. After having considered the rival submission upon perusal of record, no doubt there appears allegation against the petitioner for entering into conspiracy with his daughter to defraud the bank, but the principal accused-cum-daughter of the petitioner namely Amrita Priyadarshini Patro has already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in BLAPL No.11656 of 2024, so also co-accused Pankajini Patro in BLAPL No.12686 of 2022 and Pranaya Purnamasi Patro in ABLAPL No.8933 of 2018. In the aforesaid premises and on consideration of the materials placed on record and the main allegation being directed against co-accused Amrita Priyadarshini Patro, who has already been granted bail, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits the petitioner to bail.

¶19

5. Hence the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail

¶20

BLAPL No.7690 of 2026 Page 3 of 4

¶21

bonds of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh) only with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions except cash surety as deem fit and proper by it.

¶22

6. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference.

¶23

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶24

Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 10^th Day of September, of 2026/ Jayakrushna

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Sep-2026 20:03:14

¶27

BLAPL No.7690 of 2026 Page 4 of 4

Prassana @ Prashan Kumar Patro v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prassana @ Prashan Kumar Patro 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