The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Dhananjaya Prusty (In BLAPL No.4175 of 2025) Nirapada Karmakar (In BLAPL No.4179 of 2025) Rinarani @ Ranuprava @ Renuprava Satapathy & another (In BLAPL No.4253 of 2025) Surendra Kumar Beura (In BLAPL No.4290 of 2025) Mohammed Iqbal Khan (In BLAPL No.5322 of 2025) Petitioners Mr. B.K.Pattnaik, Advocate (For BLAPL Nos. 4175, 4179 & 4290 of 2025) … Mr. N.K.Sahoo, Advocate (For BLAPL No. 4253 of 2025) Mr. B.C. Mohanty, Advocate (For BLAPL No. 5322 of 2025) -versus- … Opposite Party Mr. A.Pradhan, Addl. PP State of Odisha CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) 07.08.2025 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these five bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with
Legal Reasoning
the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. These five bail applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Page 1 of 6 Order No. 05. E.O.W. Bhubaneswar PS Case No.04 of 2025 arising out of CT Case No.03 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID, Cuttack for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 419/420/467/468/471/120-B of IPC, on the allegation of cheating the SME IE Branch of SBI, Madhupatna, Cuttack by producing forge documents and mortgaging landed property belonging to others resulting in causing wrongful loss to the bank to the tune of Rs.1,85,46,388/-. 4.
Legal Reasoning
Heard, Mr. Bikash Behari Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioners in BLAPL Nos.4175, 4179 & 4290 of 2025; Mr. Nalini Kanta Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.4253 of 2025; Mr.Biswa Chandan Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 5322 of 2025 and Mr. A. Pradhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. 5. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears main allegation against the co-accused Sarat Chandra Swain for giving property not belonging to him as mortgage in the bank to secure a loan of Rs.3.5Crores to partnership firm belonging to him and petitioner-Nirapada Karmakar. However, the bank only disbursed the loan for a sum of Rs.1,85,46,388/- in the name of partnership firm M/s. Maa Ganga Enterprise belonging to co-accused Sarat Chandra Swain and petitioner-Nirapada Karmakar. It is Page 2 of 6 unearthed in the course of investigation that co- accused Sarat Chandra Swain had allegedly mortgaged the property belonging to another person with same name and another. However, there is no such allegation against the petitioner-Nirapada Karmakar. The name of petitioner Rinarani @ Ranuprava @ Renuprava Satpathy, Surendra Kumar Beura, Mohammed Iqbal Khan do not figure out as accused persons in the FIR. However, there appears allegation against them for assisting the co-accused to mislead the bank official during pre-sanction inspection and subsequent inspection thereafter to deceive and induce the bank to sanction and disburse the loan money. Whether the petitioners had in fact assisted or conspired with the co-accused persons to mislead/deceive the bank officials to induce the bank for sanction of loan is a matter of trial. In the meantime, charge sheet has already been submitted in this case and the petitioners are in custody. The petitioners Dhananjaya Prusty and Surendra Kumar Beura were the partners of M/s. Maa Ganga Enterprises, but they had resigned mutually before sanction of loan to the firm. However, it is stated in the FIR that they had transferred their shares to co- accused Jonaki Karmakar and Sarat Chandra Swain as new partners of the firm before sanction of the loan. Further, the allegation against the petitioner Rinarani @ Ranuprava @ Renuprava Satpathy is for providing her house on rent to co-accused persons to run the Page 3 of 6 business firm and she being a lady, is also further entitled to the benefit of the first proviso appended to Section 480 of BNSS. 6. In view of the above facts and after having considered the rival submissions and on going through the materials placed on record, since the main allegation being directed against co-accused Sarat Chandra Swain for deceiving the bank by producing the documents of the property belonging to another person and keeping in view the right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial and there being no materials produced to prima facie indicate about any apprehension of the petitioners not attending the trial, this Court considers it proper to grant bail to each of the petitioners by imposing stringent conditions. 7. Hence, these five bail applications of the petitioners namely Dhananjaya Prusty in BLAPL No.4175 of 2025, Nirapada Karmakar in BLAPL No. 4179 of 2025, Rinarani @ Ranuprava @ Renuprava Saapathy & Niranjan Satapathy in BLAPL No. 4253 of 2025, Surendra Kumar Beura in BLAPL No. 4290 of 2025 & Mohammed Iqbal Khan in BLAPL No. 5322 of 2025 are allowed and each of the petitioners are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin of the case on such terms and Page 4 of 6 conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:- (i) the petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail, fail unless their attendance (ii) the petitioners in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without is dispensed with. In case the Petitioners fail without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may for proceed against the Petitioners in offence U/S.269 of BNS, 2023 accordance with law, (iii) the petitioners shall inform the Court as well as the IO as to their places of residence during the trial by providing their mobile number(s), residential address, e-mail, if any, and other documents in support of proof of their residence, (iv) in case the petitioners misuse the liberty of bail and in order to secure their presence, proclamation U/S.84 of BNSS is issued and the petitioners fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the learned trial Court is at liberty to initiate proceeding against them for offence U/S.209 of the BNS in accordance with law, an appropriate (v) This Court reserves liberty to the EOW to for make modification/recalling the order passed by this Court, if for any reason, the petitioners violate any of the conditions imposed by this Court or the Court in seisin over the matter. application In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioners in future for similar/grave offences on prima facie accusations may Page 5 of 6 be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, these BLAPL Nos. 4175, 4179,
Decision
4253, 4290 & 5322 of 2025 stand disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. (G. Satapathy) Judge S.Sasmal Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Aug-2025 11:30:04 Page 6 of 6