The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.242 of 2025 Diptikanta@ Deeptikanta Choudhury …. Petitioner M/s. B. Pujari, Advocate & Associates State of Odisha (Vigilance) -Versus- …. Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Das, Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department BLAPL No.142 of 2025 Abinash Pradhan Petitioner M/s. Sadasiva Patra, Advocate & Associates …. State of Odisha (Vigilance) -Versus- ….
Legal Reasoning
Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Das, Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department BLAPL No.335 of 2025 Satyaki Patnaik Petitioner M/s. S.K. Padhi, Senior Advocate & Associates …. State of Odisha (Vigilance) -Versus- …. Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Das, Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
Decision
ORDER 29.01.2025 Order No. 04. 1. Heard Mr. Padhi, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner in BLAPL No.335 of 2025, Mr. Pujari, learned counsel for the accused in BLAPL No. 242 of 2025 and Mr. Patra, learned counsel appearing in BLAPL No.142 of 2025 besides Mr. Das, learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department. Page 1 of 4 2. Instant petitions under Section 483 BNSS are filed for release of the petitioners on bail in connection with VGR Case No.37 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Special Judge Vigilance, Bhubaneswar arising out of Cuttack Vigilance Cell P.S. Case No.15 dated 10th December, 2024 registered under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(a) of the P.C.(Amendment) Act, 2018 and other allied offences on the grounds stated therein. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Padhi, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner in BLAPL No.335 of 2025 that admittedly, there has been receipt of money, a part of the crime proceed in the account of the accused but number of persons are shown to be involved including some of the officials of the CT & GST Territorial Range, Bhubaneswar but then, the alleged mischief has taken place with fresh appeals having been filed not by him but others and considering the same and that two of the officials are already under interim protection, the present accused should be granted bail, even though, the chargesheet is not filed, as the entire case is based on documentary evidence. Mr. Pujari, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 242 of 2025 submits that the petitioner is a dealer and he is not directly involved with regard to the alleged mischief, though, there has been receipt of money in his account as well and therefore, he should also be enlarged on bail. Mr. Patra, learned counsel for the other accused in BLAPL No.142 of 2025 submits that the petitioner was a Clerk working in the establishment at the relevant point of time and since, the higher officials have been granted interim protection, he should be released with conditions. 4. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the Vigilance Department produced a copy of the para-wise report, he received in the meantime, to claim that an amount of Rs.1.23 crore was received in the account of one of the accused persons, namely, Diptikanta @ Page 2 of 4 Deeptikanta Choudhury and substantial part of it, was withdrawn leaving an amount of Rs.94,209/- only and in so far as the other accused, namely Satyaki Patnaik is concerned, the entire amount of Rs.2.8 crore was withdrawn and there is nothing left in the account maintained in his name and therefore, considering the same and the nature of allegations and involvement of all the accused persons and the manner in which the crime was perpetrated, they should not be granted bail including the accused, namely, Abinash Pradhan, an employee of the Department concerned. 5. Gone through the details of the allegations made against the petitioners revealed from the F.I.R. In fact, it is made to reveal that fresh appeals were filed and the amount came to be refunded and accordingly, the refund was made and ultimately, the amounts were received in the accounts of two of the petitioners named above. As informed by Mr. Padhi, learned Senior Advocate, some of the officials of the CT & GST Department are under interim protection in ABLAPL Nos.14749 of 2024, 14371 of 2024 and 14805 of 2024. In fact, it is made to understand that the appeals were filed and it was apparently not at the instance of the petitioners in BLAPL No.242 and 335 of 2025 and thereafter, with the orders being passed therein, the amount was managed to be refunded and ultimately, received in the accounts and finally, it was withdrawn. Considering the circumstances leading to the misappropriation and that, two of the petitioners are recipients of the same though allegedly the amount to have been withdrawn in the meantime and the fact that the other accused to be an official of the CT & GST Department, the Court considering the same and the fact that the case is based on documents and in the meantime, seizures have taken place with regard to the relevant records, the petitioners, who are in judicial custody from 12th December, 2024, should be allowed to go on bail with stringent conditions. Page 3 of 4 6. 7. Hence, it is ordered. In the result, petitions under Section 483 BNSS stand allowed. Consequently, the petitioners are directed to go on bail in connection with VGR Case No.37 of 2024 arising out of Cuttack Vigilance Cell P.S. Case No.15 dated 10th December, 2024 subject to them furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) each with one solvent surety for the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge Vigilance, Bhubaneswar, who shall be at liberty to impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case besides the following, such as, the petitioners in BLAPL Nos.242 and 335 of 2025 shall furnish cash security of Rs.5 lac each and property surety of Rs.70 lac each and surrender their passports before the court below and further not to leave its jurisdiction without obtaining permission and at the same time, all of them are to appear before the I.O as and when required with an undertaking submitted at the P.S. in that regard. 8. In case, any of the conditions imposed is/are violated, while on bail, it shall forthwith entail cancellation bail granted to the petitioners without any reference to this Court. 9. The BLAPLs are disposed of accordingly. 10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. 11. A free copy of the order be immediately supplied to Mr. Das, learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department as prayed for. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJINA SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CTC Rojina Date: 30-Jan-2025 10:50:11 (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Page 4 of 4