Ruby Dash vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

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

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr.Sarthak Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the CBI-Opposite Party.

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with CBI: SPE: Bhubaneswar Case No.RC0152024A0004 dtd.22.06.2024 corresponding to RC No.4 (A) of 2024 pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge CBI -1, Bhubaneswar for alleged commission of offence under Section 120-B of I.P.C. r/w Section 7 of PC Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018).

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 22.06.2024. He further contended that in the meantime the investigation has progressed substantially. Further, referring to the allegation made in the F.I.R., learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a trap was laid against one Sushanta Kumar Das who is the principal accused in this case. In the said process, the petitioner was caught by the investigating agency while accepting Rs.10,000/-learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submitted that there is nothing of record to demonstrate that the petitioner has made any demands of bribe. He further contended that the petitioner is a Government employee therefore there is no chance of absconding. He further contended that the petitioner is having a year old child and she required to look after the child. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as this Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Mr. Sarthak Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the CBI stated that there are ample materials on record to establish the involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged crime. Further, referring to his reply affidavit, learned counsel for the CBI submitted that it was revealed during verification that accused petitioner namely, one Sushanta Kumar Das demanded the bribe amount on behalf of the present petitioner, who was working as Inspector of Posts, Badasahi Sub Division of District Mayurbhanj, Odisha. For the purpose of allowing the Time Related Community Allowance to the complainant namely, Shri Ajit Kumar Rout and to sanction the maternity lave to his wife smt. Jyotishree Sahoo, GDS ABPM, Narangan BO under Manatri SO under Badasahi Sub Division, Mayurbhanj. He further submitted that the complainant was able to arrange a sum of Rs.10,000/- out of the total demanded bribe amount of Rs.40,000/-, to hand over to the prime suspect Sushanta Kumar Das. He further submitted that during the trap the principal accused namely Sushanta Kumar Das was caught red handed while demanding and accepting bribe amount of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant at his residence and that the prime accused has said that he had taking the money on behalf of the present petitioner, which was recorded by the CBI Investigating team in presence of independent witnesses. Subsequently it was decided that on attempt be made towards control delivery of the aforementioned bribe amount to the present petitioner by the prime accused Sushanta Kumar Das Thereafter, the prime accused went to the house of the present petitioner where he handed over the bribe amount of Rs.10,000/- to the present petitioner, which the petitioner accepted. Finally, recovery of Rs.10,000/- was made from the present petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the CBI further submitted that after observing all legal formalities, the present petitioner along with prime accused Sushanta Kumar Das were arrested on 22.06.2024. In the aforesaid factual background learned counsel for the CBI submitted that present petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail at this juncture.

Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and, on careful consideration of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, this Court observes that the present petitioner is a Government employee was working as Inspector of Posts.

Therefore, there is no chance of her absconding. Further taking into consideration the nature of allegation, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/-(Rupees Forty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter. Violation of any of the aforesaid terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

...………………………….