High CourtsSingle Bench

Pradhum Kumar Mandal vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 29 November 2023 · Citation: (2023) 11 OHC CK 0096

HON’BLE JUDGES
G. Satapathy, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 66C, 67D
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 10760 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 703 words

G. Satapathy, J

1.

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

2.

This is an application U/S. 439 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Cyber Crime P.S. Case No.02 of 2022 (of District-CID) corresponding to C.T. Case No.525 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 419/ 420/ 467/ 468/471/120-B/34 of the IPC and U/Ss. 66(C) and 67(D) of Information Technology Act on the allegation of duping number of persons by defrauding them using their mobile numbers through payment gateways in online purchases.

3.

Heard G.R. Dhal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. S.R. Sahoo, learned ASC in the matter and perused the record.

4.

In response to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner earlier, a report as to the status of the case was called for from the Court in seisin of the case, who in its report dated 23.11.2023 has made it clear that none of the witnesses have been examined till today, but it is brought to the knowledge of the Court that the petitioner is in custody since 29.01.2022.

5.

In view of the above facts and taking into consideration the rival submissions and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in custody and release of co-accused Sundram Charan on bail in BLAPL No. 2987 of 2022 and last but not the least, keeping in view the mandate of law as enunciated by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2021) 10 SCC 773, this Court considers that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail to him.

6.

This Court, however, finds some merit in the submission of the learned ASC that since the petitioner being a resident of outside State, some stringent conditions are required to be imposed upon him for his release on bail.

7.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two local solvent sureties 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 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.229-A of IPC in accordance with law.

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case and

(iv) the petitioner shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a fortnight preferably on a Sunday of every week in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for six(06) months from the actual date of release from the custody.

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

It is, however, 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 any offence under NDPS Act on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

It is made clear that the Court in seisin of the case, while releasing the Petitioner on bail may verify the residential proof of the local sureties by taking the help of local police, if required to ascertain their proof of residence and such exercise must be completed within a reasonable period of not more than one week.

8.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

9.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

………………………………