Chizobam Krist @ Christoperchizobam @ Krist vs State Of Odisha

G. Satapathy, J

This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with CID, CB Cyber Crime PS Case No.10 of 2024 corresponding to CT Case No.391 of 2024 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Bhubaneswar for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 419/420/465/467/468/471/120-B/34 of IPC r/w Sec.66(C)/66(D) of IT Act.

The allegation against the petitioner emanates from the fact that the informant having prior acquaintance with one ex-bureaucrat of Odisha received an E-mail stated to be from him for supply of Iranian Saffron to the World Bank headquarter on the expectation of good profit margin and he accordingly, supplied 110Kgs of Iranian Saffron as per the purchase order stated to be issued by World Bank at the cost of Rs.2.7Crores deposited in different Indian Bank accounts as per the invoice enclosed and accordingly, in the process, it is stated that World Bank signed a contract with him for supply of 6600Kgs of Iranian Saffron at the rate of 550Kg per month, but the organization claimed to be World Bank asked him to open an off-shore Bank account with Vault Off-Shore Bank which was accordingly opened by depositing a sum of $53,000USD, but his arrear bill amounting to $1.2milliion USD as agreed upon could be deposited to his account, however, the informant received a letter from Vault Off-Shore Bank asking him to deposit a sum of $77,550USD towards insurance coverage and this is how the informant came to know about cyber fraud upon him. Accordingly, he lodged an FIR resulting in registration of Cyber Crime Police Station case no.10 of 2024 necessitating the investigation in this case and in the course of investigation, finding the involvement of the present petitioner who is a Nigerian National, he was arrested ultimately landing him before this Court in this bail application.

Ms. Sushma Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner appearing virtually submits that although the petitioner is a foreigner, but he would abide by any terms and conditions for his release on bail and accordingly, he draws the attention of the Court to the judgment of the Apex Court in Frank Vitus Vrs. Narcotics Control Bureau and others; 2025 INSC 30. She further submits that although there appears allegation against the petitioner for misappropriating Rs.2.7Crores by transferring the same to nine accounts, but the prosecution has utterly failed to connect the petitioner with the transfer of the aforesaid amount to nine accounts and all the allegations leveled against the petitioner are mere allegation only and no one should be deprived of his life and liberty merely on some allegation and the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition which would be imposed on him for his release on bail. On the aforesaid submission, Ms. Sharma prays to grant bail to the petitioner on any condition.

3.1. On the other hand, Mr. Brahmananda Tripathy, learned counsel for the informant by taking this Court through the relevant paragraph of the charge-sheet submits that not only it has been alleged against the petitioner, but also he has confessed before the police for committing the crime and therefore, once the petitioner is released on bail, he may abscond from the country. On the aforesaid submission Mr. Tripathy prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner.

3.2. More or less is the similar submission advanced by Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Addl. PP who in the course of opposing grant of bail to the petitioner submits that not only the petitioner has defrauded the innocent person, but also he along with his associates has committed the crime by forging pass-port and visa and therefore, once the petitioner is released on bail, he would abscond from the process of law. Accordingly, Mr. Satpathy, prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner. In addition to his oral submission Mr. Satpathy also supplies the copy of written instruction received from the IO in this case.

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation of cheating the informant by way of cyber fraud for a sum of Rs.2.7Crores which was in fact deposited in nine Indian Bank accounts and in the course of investigation, the investigating officer noticed that many of the ATM withdrawals were done from Vasant Vihar, New Delhi and accordingly the investigation focused on ATM withdrawals made at Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. It is alleged by the investigating officer that in the course of investigation, they found the present petitioner a Nigerian doing account selling business and withdrawing money from ATM to distribute the proceeds among themselves. It is also alleged that the investigating officer seized the incriminating materials including one SBI Banking kit with pass-port standing in the name of Neelu Gupta from the co-accused Nnamdi Stanley Mbamalu @ German. Further, the petitioner was allegedly found for having fake passport and visa which was evident from ther eply to the SP CBI, Odisha from Foreigners Regional Registration Office, Bureau of Immigration and it, therefore, gives a reasonable apprehension that the petitioner may abscond if released on bail. The decision in Frank Vitus(supra) as relied on by the petitioner being for the condition of bail, the same may not be useful to the petitioner inasmuch as this Court is not considering the bail application of the petitioner positively.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstance and taking into account the nature and gravity of the offences together with modus operandi of commission of the crime involving huge amount of money and regard being had to the alleged involvement of the petitioner who is allegedly found to have fake and forged “passport and visa”, this Court does not find any good ground to grant bail to the petitioner.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of the order be immediately communicated to the learned trial Court.