Meenarani Naik v. State of Odisha (Vig.)
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ss. 13(1)(b), 13(2)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 34
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. Taking into account the nature of allegations and that the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.5532 of 2025 was taken into custody and released on bail, this Court is persuaded to hold that custodial interrogation of the Petitioners is not warranted in the case at hand.…
- Para 1010. Accordingly, the ABLAPLs stand disposed of being allowed. (V. NARASINGH) Judge PKS Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PRADEEP KUMAR SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 14-May-2025 15:48:41
Judgment
Mr. M.S. Rizvi, Standing Counsel (Vigilance) ABLAPL No.5532 of 2025 Dr. Umakanta Khejuria …. Petitioner Mr. R. Behera, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha (Vig.) …. Opposite Party Mr. M.S. Rizvi, Standing Counsel (Vigilance) CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH ORDER 14.05.2025 Order No.
Since both the matters arise out of Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No.40 of 2024, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order on the consent of the parties.
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance.
The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with V.G.R. Case No.08 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Dhenkanal, arising out of Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No.40 of 2024 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 13(2)/13(1)(b) of the P.C. Act read with Section 34 IPC.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.5532 of 2025 is the principal accused and on laying a successful trap he was taken into custody in connection with Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No.41 of 2022 and has since been released on bail and thereafter the present FIR has been filed under Sections 13(2)/13(1)(b) of the P.C Act, 1988.
It is stated that taking into account the nature of allegation, custodial interrogation of the Petitioners is not necessary.
It is further stated that the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.5531 of 2025 is the wife of the principal accused.
Such submission is opposed by the learned counsel for the Vigilance Department.
Taking into account the nature of allegations and that the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.5532 of 2025 was taken into custody and released on bail, this Court is persuaded to hold that custodial interrogation of the Petitioners is not warranted in the case at hand. Accordingly, it is directed that on surrendering within three weeks hence and moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed just and proper.
It is needless to state that the Petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O as and when summoned and while summoning the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.5531 of 2025, this Court has no iota of doubt that the I.O shall be alive to the fact that the Petitioner is a lady. It shall be open to the prosecution to seek variance of the order, if the Petitioners do not extend the desired cooperation.
Accordingly, the ABLAPLs stand disposed of being allowed. (V. NARASINGH) Judge PKS Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PRADEEP KUMAR SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 14-May-2025 15:48:41
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.