Gagan Bihari Mishra vs State Of Odisha Vs

G. Satapathy, J.

This is a bail application U/S.439 of CrPC by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with EOW PS Case No.3 of 2018 corresponding to CT Case No.5 of 2018 pending in the file of learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act, Cuttack, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.420/ 467/ 468/ 471/ 406/ 120-B of IPC r/w Section 6 of OPID Act, on the allegation of cheating by forging documents and entering into conspiracy with co-accused persons.

Heard, Mr. Yasobant Das, learned Senior Counsel, who is being assisted by Mr. Ansuman Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.P. Patra, learned counsel for the OPID in the present matter and perused the record.

2.1. In objecting the bail application of the petitioner, Mr. Patra has specifically submitted that no doubt the son of the petitioner, who is the builder has already been granted bail by an order of the Apex Court, but the role played by the present petitioner is in fact contributed to the detriment to the cause of the innocent purchasers of flats because a sum of Rs.2 Crores 92 Lakhs has been transferred from the account of the son of the present petitioner to the personal account of the present petitioner and they have also taken a loan of Rs.8 Crores from the DHFL, which is yet to be returned/repaid and not a single flat has been handed over to any prospective buyers.

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears some allegation against the petitioner, but the principal accused Mr. Durga Prasanna Mishra has been granted bail by an order passed by the Apex Court in SLP(Crl.) No.10184 of 2022. It is also not in dispute that the present petitioner is aged about 75 years and he was in custody for around three years. The petitioner was admittedly on interim bail, but when this Court asked him to surrender to custody, he challenged it before the Apex Court in SLP(Crl.) No.10184 of 2022, in which the petitioner was protected by way of extension of the interim bail, but subsequently the Apex Court while disposing of the SLP has directed this Court to fix up a date for hearing and dispose of the regular bail application on merit, while setting aside the impugned order partly directing the petitioner to surrender to custody. Further, the trial is yet to be concluded and 6 out of 85 witnesses have been examined till today as per the admitted submission of the parties. In the circumstance, as to when the trial would be concluded is still a guess, but it would definitely take considerable time.

In view of the above facts and circumstance and after having considered the rival submissions and taking into account the age and the custody of the petitioner and his right to speedy trial as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and keeping in view the grant of bail to principal accused Mr. Durga Prasanna Mishra, this Court without expressing any view on merits admits the petitioner to bail.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) only 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 petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

(ii) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.269 of BNS, 2023 in accordance with law,

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by intimating his present address of stay to the concerned Court.

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner 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. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for similar/grave offences on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

.................................................