The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 58. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Ashok Kumar Sundaray (In BLAPL No.6022 of 2018) Nirupama Sundaray (In BLAPL No.6023 of 2018) … Petitioners Mr. P.K. Jena, Advocate State of Orissa … Opposite Party -versus- Mr. A. Nayak, Advocate(OPID) Mr. A. Samantaray, Advocate(Informant) Mr. N. Lenka, Advocate(Intervener) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) 21.07.2025 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these two bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of
Legal Reasoning
the learned counsel for the parties. 3. These are the bail applications U/S.439 of CrPC by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with EOW Bhubaneswar PS Case No.09 of 2018 corresponding to CT Case No. 10 of 2017 pending in the file of learned Presiding Officer Designated Court, OPID, Cuttack for commission of offences punishable Under Sections 467/468/471/420/120(B)/406 of IPC and r/w Section 6 of the OPID Act, on the main allegation of not Page 1 of 5 handing over the flats to the prospective home buyer after receiving the amount. 4.
Legal Reasoning
Heard, Mr. P.K. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioners in both BLAPLs, Mr. Anil Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID, Mr. Anugraha Samantaray, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Niranjan Lenka, learned counsel for the Intervener in the matter and perused the record. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties upon perusal of record, it is not disputed that the Petitioners are on interim bail since 29.07.2019 and on many occasions, their interim bail has been extended by different Coordinate Benches of this Court, however, there is no adverse report received against any of the Petitioners for misusing the liberty. Further, the Petitioner-Ashok Kumar Sundaray was taken into custody on 17.05.2027 and he remained in custody for around 02 years and 02 months before admitting him to interim bail. Similarly, co-accused Nirupama Sundaray who is the wife of Ashok Kumar Sundaray was also taken into custody on 18.11.2017 and she was admitted to interim bail on 29.07.2019. Further, the learned trial Court on being requested has submitted a report as to the status of trial in which it is found that only 04 out of 67 charge sheet witnesses have been examined till 15.07.2025 and, therefore, the trial would take a considerable time. True it is that, there is serious allegation against the Petitioners for not handing over Page 2 of 5 the flats to the prospective home buyers after receiving the amount, but the Petitioners have been remained in custody for around two years and have been admitted to interim bail and they are continuing interim bail for last six years. At this stage, it is not desirable to ask the Petitioners to surrender to custody, more particularly when there is no adverse report is received against them. However, they are required to comply the conditions for grant of bail. 6. In view of the above facts and after having considered the rival submissions and on going through the materials placed on record including the inherent right of the accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, this Court by making the interim bail absolute admits the Petitioners to regular bail. 7. Hence, these two bail applications of the petitioners namely Ashok Kumar Sundaray and Nirupama Sundaray stand allowed and each of the petitioners is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Laks) 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 as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:- (i) the petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail and the Petitioners shall appear before the IO as and when required to cooperate the investigation till disposal of the case. Page 3 of 5 fail unless (ii) the petitioners in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without their attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioners fail without sufficient cause to appear in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioners for offence U/S.269 of BNS,2023 in accordance with law, in the Court (iii) the petitioners shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by intimating their present address of stay to the concerned Court, (iv) the Petitioners shall inform the Court as well as the Investigating Agency as to their place 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. The Petitioners their address of shall not change residence without intimating to the Court and Investigating Agency, (v) in case the Petitioners misuse the liberty of bail and in order to secure their presence, proclamation U/S.84 of BNSS, 2023 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 in offence U/S.209 of BNS, 2023 accordance with law. Page 4 of 5 the informant application (vi) This Court reserves liberty to the file OPID and for appropriate modification/recalling the order passed by this Court, if for any reason, the petitioners violate any of the conditions imposed by this Court. to (vii) Since the learned counsel for the Petitioners submits on instruction that the Petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions of the agreement, they are the admitted directed agreement made between them and the prospective home buyers. comply to It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. 8. Accordingly, these BLAPL Nos. 6022 and
Decision
6023 of 2018 stand disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. (G. Satapathy) Judge Priyajit Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PRIYAJIT SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 22-Jul-2025 14:01:15 Page 5 of 5