Bibhuti Bhusan Acharya vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with Bhadrak Rural P.S.Case No.77 of 2024 corresponding to G.R.Case No.300 of 2024 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak for alleged commission of offence under Section 294,420,467,468,506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Heard Mr.D.P.Dhal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr.S.Palit, learned senior counsel appearing for the informant as well as Mr.Arupananda Das, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the bail application.

It is submitted by Mr.D.P.Dhal, learned senior counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner, who is a practicing lawyer is languishing in custody since 13.04.2024. He further submitted that in the meantime the investigation of the case has been substantially progressed. Further, referring to the allegations made in the F.I.R., learned senior counsel submitted that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contended that since the Petitioner belongs to the locality, there is no chance of his absconding. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be enlarged on bail on any suitable terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

Mr.Palit, learned senior counsel appearing for the informant submitted that a total sum of Rs.1,49,00,000/- has been credited to the account of the Petitioner. He further submitted that the entire life savings of the informant is lost and he has been cheated by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant further contended that this is a serious misconduct on the part of the Petitioner, who is a lawyer by profession. On such ground, learned counsel for the informant submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected.

Mr.Arupananda Das, learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand contended that the investigation is on. Therefore release of the Petitioner at this juncture will cause delay in conclusion of the investigation and filing of Charge Sheet. He also contended that in the event the Petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of his absconding from justice. On such ground, learned counsel for the State submitted that the bail application of the Petitioner should not be entertained at this juncture.

Mr.Dhal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner is ready and willing to refund an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- to the informant at the time of his release on bail. Thereafter within a period of six weeks, he will refund another sum of Rs.25,00,000/- to the informant. He also contended that the Petitioner had no intention to cheat the informant.

Having heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, the counsel for the informant and the learned Additional Government Advocate and considering the surrounding facts and circumstances of the case as well as the materials on record, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on interim bail in the aforesaid case for a period of eight weeks subject to the condition that the Petitioner shall refund Rs.20,00,000/- to the informant at the time of release on bail and shall refund Rs.25,00,000/- within six weeks from the date of his release on bail. The release of the Petitioner on interim bail shall also be subject to such terms and conditions that would be imposed by the learned court in seisin over the matter. Violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of interim bail. It is further directed that the Petitioner shall surrender before the court in seisin over the matter on the due date.

List this matter in the week commencing from 15th July, 2024.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

..…………………………..