Rupali Gupta ….. State of Odisha (CID, Crime Branch) v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 3805 of 2024 Rupali Gupta ….. State of Odisha (CID, Crime Branch) Vs. ….. Petitioner Mr. Sukumar Gourab, Advocate and Mr. A.K. Subudhi, Advocate Opposite Party Ms. S. Mishra, A.S.C. Order No. 03. CORAM: JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 19.07.2024 (Through hybrid mode) 1. This application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed in connection with Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 21 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 1630 of 2023 pending in the court of the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar registered under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 471, 120-B, 34 of IPC read with Sections 66(C) / 66 (D) of I.T. Act. 2. This bail application was listed before me as BLAPL No. 370 of 2024 filed by co-accused Tej Kumar, BLAPL No. 375 of 2024 filed by co-accused Ashish Kumar and BLAPL No. 378 of 2024 filed by co-accused Yogendra Singh had been dismissed by me on 22.01.2024, granting liberty to them to move for bail after completion of investigation. Page 1 of 9 3. Chargesheet dated 18.03.2024 has been submitted against the petitioner – Rupali Gupta and co-accused Tej Kumar, Ashish Kumar, Bhanu Pratap Yadav, Yogendra Singh, Raghu Anand, Bhim, Pramoda Valli for commission of offences under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 471, 120-B/34 of IPC read with Sections 66- C/66-D of IT Act, 2000, keeping investigation open under Section 173 (8) of Cr.P.C. 4. The prayer for bail of the petitioner and co-accused Bhanu Pratap Yadav has been rejected by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar vide common order dated 27.03.2024 passed in B.A. No. 158 of 2024 filed by the petitioner and B.A. No. 123 of 2024 filed by co-accused Bhanu Pratap Yadav.
Facts
5. Initially FIR was registered against unknown persons on the information of one Anil Kumar Jalan on 04.10.2023 at the Cyber Cell Police Station for commission of offences under Sections- 419, 420, 465, 467, 471, 120-B, 34 of IPC read with Sections 66(C) / 66(D) of IT Act. He alleged that he has a HDFC Life Insurance Policy in the name of his wife. In the first week of July, 2023, he received a call from an unknown person regarding premature release of the policy. He received calls from numbers Page 2 of 9 9812467649, 7207660964, 9911266906, 9193041401, 9812493952, 9953057289, 8376858433, 9910586356, 9911041392, 8750376496 and as per the advice of the caller, he transferred Rs.76,15,955/- to different bank accounts between 05.07.2023 to 28.09.2023 in Account No. 921010046625512, 34889554692, 10577035908 and 2845322439 and had attached the payment details. During investigation it was found that from these accounts, amounts had been withdrawn or transferred to other accounts and most again withdrawn. 6. The petitioner had called the informant from Mobile Number 991041392, which has been seized from the petitioner during investigation. The informant had sent the voice recording during one of these calls which has been sent to the SFSL for examination and opinion. During investigation, the petitioner has confessed about her role and that she was working with co- accused Raghu Ananda and Bhim. An attendance register, a number of mobile phones, debit cards, sim cards and eight note pads have been seized from her exclusive and conscious possession at 2nd floor rented house of Rajneesh Verma at 621/C, Hari Nagar. Her communication (messages) with co-accused Page 3 of 9 Raghu Anand, Tej Kumar, Pramada Valli, Bhanu Pratap Yadav and informant has been seized during investigation which is incriminatory. She uses three other names – Aditi Agrawal, Nidhi Sharma and Mansi for duping persons. Her statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act has been recorded and four mobile phones and a number of sim cards have been seized from her apart from eight note pads containing information related to the crime. She has a criminal antecedent in Uttar Pradesh - Bareli P.S. Case No 9 of 2024 which is under Sections – 406/ 420 of the I.P.C and where she had used the name Aditi Agrawal (using the same mobile – i.e 9911041392.) Her sample voice has been recorded and also sent to the SFSL for testing.
Legal Reasoning
shortcomings in the investigation are only prima facie views and made for purpose of considering the bail application and should not influence the learned trial court in any manner. puspa (Savitri Ratho) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 06-Aug-2024 18:20:31 Page 9 of 9
Arguments
7. I have heard Mr. Sukumar Gourab, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel and perused the case diary. 8. Mr. Sukumar Gourab, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a woman aged about 26 years and is in custody since 21.11.2023. The allegation of the informant is totally false, fabricated and baseless. He submits that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents and no amount has been credited to the bank account of the petitioner and there Page 4 of 9 is no allegation that she has forged any document. Therefore, even accepting the allegations against the petitioner to be true no offence under Sections - 465, 467, 471, of the IPC nor Sections 66 (C) and 66(D) of the IT Act is made out against her. He has further submitted that although the petitioner has co-operated with the investigation, the investigation itself is defective for which the case cannot stand against the petitioner during trial. Referring to the seizure lists and the case diary, he has submitted that alleged seizure of mobile phone and sim cards from the petitioner / at her instance cannot be accepted because of fatal infirmities in the investigation. He finally submits that the petitioner is a woman and as investigation of the case, so far as the petitioner is concerned has been completed and she is a permanent resident of New Delhi, there is no chance of her tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses or absconding, for which she may be released on bail. 9. Ms. S. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel vehemently opposed the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner has played a vital role in the crime which has been pre-planned carefully. She has allegedly made the phone calls and convinced the informant to transfer money to the accounts of her co– Page 5 of 9 accused. All the accused persons including the petitioner have acted pursuant to a well chalked out plan to cheat persons of their savings and investments and this could not have happened without active connivance of the petitioner. She has used three other names – Aditi Agrawal, Nidhi Sharma and Manshi while talking with the informant, which is evidence of her dishonest intention. Recovery of the multiple mobile phones with different sim numbers is indicative of the fact that she had made a number of phone calls using different names to dupe and convince the informant and his wife to transfer money to various accounts of the co-accused. She has further submitted that this is not the stage to consider the contentions regarding defective investigation and the same can only be proved / disproved during the trial after evidence is recorded. She has finally submitted that since the petitioner is not a resident of Odisha, she is likely to abscond if released on bail, which will affect the further investigation and trial of the case. As she has a criminal antecedent under Sections – 406/ 420 IPC, she is likely to indulge in further crimes if she is released on bail. 10. By the alleged actions of the petitioner, the informant has been cheated of a huge amount of money. I have not gone into the Page 6 of 9 contentions as to whether the case diary contains specific details of the ingredients of the offences alleged to have been committed against her and whether the investigation is defective. On going through the case diary, I find that the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation for which the Police has been able to seize a number of mobile phones, a number of sim cards, her voice recording, documents etc. related to the crime. 11. Preliminary chargesheet has been submitted in the case keeping further investigation open. The petitioner is a woman. The offences alleged against her are triable by a Magistrate. I am satisfied that her continued detention in custody is not going to aid further investigation in the case as her custodial interrogation at this stage is not feasible. On the other hand she can be granted bail with the conditions that she should co-operate with further investigation and to ensure that she does not abscond and is available for the trial. 12. It is accordingly ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the learned court in seisin over the case may consider fit and proper, including the following conditions : (i) She shall furnish cash security of Rs 50,000/-. Page 7 of 9 (ii) One of the sureties shall be her blood relation. (iii) She shall cooperate with further imnvestigation and appear before the I.O. as and when required. (iv) She shall inform the learned Court in seisin over the matter about the address where she intends to reside after her release as well as her permanent address along with name of the Police Station, so that both the same can be verified by the I.O. and so that the latter can establish contact with the Officer in Charge / Station House Officer before she is released on bail. (v) She shall provide her mobile number(s) to the learned SDJM Bhubaneswar, so that the same can be verified by the I.O., before she is released on bail. The number(s) should be kept charged so that it/they is/are accessible. Any change in the mobile number(s) shall be immediately informed to the Court, by her or her counsel within two days of the change. (vi) The petitioner, while on bail, shall report to the Officer in Charge / Station House Officer of the Police Station within whose jurisdiction she resides / shall reside, once in every fortnight and intimate any change in address to him and to the I.O. in the case, immediately. (vii) She shall surrender passport in the Court in seisin over the case. In case she does not possess a passport, she shall submit an affidavit to that effect. 13. In the event of violation of any of these conditions or any other condition that may be imposed by the learned Court below Page 8 of 9 independently, it would be open to the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail. 14. Observations in this order regarding nature of allegation or