Chakradhar Nath State of Odisha … v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 13483 of 2023 Chakradhar Nath State of Odisha ….. Vs. ….. Petitioner Mr. A. K. Sahoo, Adv. Opp. Party Mr. M. R. Mishra, A.S.C. Mr. Abakash Nanda, Advocate (for informant) CORAM: JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Decision
ORDER 12.03.2024 (Through hybrid mode) Order No. 08. 1. This application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed in connection with CRRI P.S. case No. 157 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 792 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C. (city), Cuttack, where charge sheet dated 08.02.2024 has been filed under Section 419,420,465,468,471,120(b),34 of the IPC against the petitioner, one Jagabandhu Nath, Alok Kumar Mandal, Santosh Kumar Mohanty, keeping investigation open. 2. The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected on 21.11.2023 by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack when investigation was in progress. 3. The prosecution allegation in brief as per the F.I.R. is that Page 1 of 5 one Jagabandhu Nath of Sigmapur (Nathasahi) cheated the informant-Sarat Kumar Singh of Rs.12,39,000/- introducing himself as one Bijay Biswal. He had showed him a property stating that it belonged to one Dhruba Charan Pradhan and taken money by introducing Chakradhara Nath of Nathasahi as Dhruba Pradhan Charan (owner of the land). Alok Kumar Mandal @ Mantu who had earlier played a role in a land deal had sent them to the informant. On 04.06.2023, Chakradhar Nath and Jagabandhu Nath came to his home introducing themselves as Dhruba Pradhan and Bijay Biswal respectively with fake documents of Dhruba Pradhan like Adhar Card and PATTA and took Rs.50,000/- and a cheque of Rs. 1,50,000/-. After some days they returned the cheque of Rs.1,50,000/- to the complainant and asked for cash. When the informant wanted to visit the landowners house at Jiginpur, Jagabandhu Nath took him to visit his nieces house at Monaharpur. The informant had gone to his niece’s house (Bhalu) with his driver Sree Bikash Parida, Dilip Swain (friend) and Sree Subhrajit Singha (brother). There they had given Rs.9,50,000/- to them with proper bond paper on 05.06.2023. Later they learnt that Bhalu was not the niece of the landowner. On 17.06.2023 Jagabandhu Nath had come to the Page 2 of 5 complainant’s house with one person named Rajesh Kumar Swain identifying him as brother-in-law of Dhruba Pradhan and took Rs.2,00,000/- by executing an agreement and stating that Dhruba Pradhan had gone with his wife to Putapathy for an operation. After some days again the fake brother-in-law asked him for some money stating more money was required for the treatment of wife of Dhruba Charan Pradhan. Complainant gave Rs.39,000/-on phone pe number of Santosh Kumar Mohanty. When the accused persons repeatedly took large amounts from him, he became suspicious. He went to the house of Dhruba Charan Biswal and after talking to him realized that the accused persons had cheated him, and that Bijay Biswal was actually Jagabandhu Nah. When he confronted Jagabandhu Nath, he assured to return the money but did not. On enquiry he learnt that all these persons had conspired and cheated him by impersonating themselves to be Dhruba Charan Pradhan and his relatives. F.I.R. has been lodged by him on 07.10.2023 at 9.00 P.M. 4. Mr. A. K. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.10.2023 and it has been alleged that in his presence only Rs.50,000/- cash has been paid, while the rest of the amount has been paid to the main accused Page 3 of 5 Jagabandhu Nath. He further submits that as investigation in the case is over, his prayer for bail may be sympathetically considered. 5. Mr. A. Nanda, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner in connivance with one Jagabandhu Nath has cheated the petitioner for an amount of Rs.12,39,000/- out of which Rs. 39,000/- has been returned by co-accused Santosh Kumar Mohanty as the said amount has been paid to his bank account Rs.1,00,000/- has been returned by co- accused Jagabandhu Nath pursuant to order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack in BLAPL No. 1512 of 2023 but further amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has not been paid by the co-accused Jagabandhu Nath. He produces the certified copy of the order dated 16.01.2024, 12.02.2024 and 13.02.2024 passed in BLAPL No. 1512 of 2023, stating that Jagabandhu Nath has been granted interim bail for a period of one month on payment of Rs.1,00,000/- to the informant and the condition that another Rs.1,00,000/- would be paid by him after his release. As he did not pay the said amount, on 13.02.2024, NBW has been issued against him. He had given an undertaking to the Court on 12.02.2024 that he shall pay the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, if he is granted one day time but he did not pay the same. The said order is taken on record. Page 4 of 5 6. Mr. M. R. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel opposes the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner along with the co-accused have hatched out a plan and cheated the informant of an amount of Rs.12,39,000/-, out of which only Rs.1,39,000/- has been returned to the informant by two co-accused persons. As the petitioner has not returned any money taken from the informant, he should not be released on bail. 7. Considering the allegations against the petitioner and the amount which has been taken from the informant in connivance with the co-accused Jagabandhu Nath and he has not returned any amount to the informant, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. 8. The BLAPL is accordingly dismissed. 9. It is open to the petitioner to move the learned Court below for bail afresh after returning some amount, which has been taken from the informant. 10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Subhalaxmi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHALAXMI PRIYADARSHANI SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 20-Mar-2024 19:39:33 Page 5 of 5