Orissa High Court
Nilesh Kumar Kar vs State Of Orissa ... Opposite Party on 5 February, 2024
Author: G. Satapathy
Bench: G. Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.13356 of 2023
Nilesh Kumar Kar ... Petitioner
Mr. T.P. Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Orissa ... Opposite Party
Mr. J.P. Patra, Advocate (OPID)
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER(ORAL)
05.02.2024 Order No.
03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with EOW, Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.15 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No.1(C) of 2023 pending in the file of learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act, Balasore, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.420/467/468/471/120-B of IPC r/w Section 66-D of IT Act and Section 6 of OPID Act, on the allegation of cheating gullible investors by receiving investment in bank accounts for Crypto Currency by becoming a member of the organization named as "Cloud Fut" on the allurement of high returns by showing fake and forged documents, but ultimately, not refunding the investment.
Page 1 of 33. Mr. T.P. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person, but he has been detained in custody since 06.04.2023 and after investigation, charge-sheet has already been filed in this case, but the charge-sheet discloses that the petitioner is also a victim of cheating as he had not received money for him, rather he had invested money in the organization and the money received by him for the organization is diverted to others account which is yet to be ascertained in the investigation. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no role in the closure of website of "Cloud Fut" and the petitioner being one of the investor of the company has been doubly punished and the petitioner being a local man, there is hardly any chance of his absconding and the petitioner, therefore, may kindly be granted bail.
4. On the other hand, Mr. J.P. Patra, learned counsel for the State-OPID vociferously objects the prayer of the petitioner and he inter-alia submits that not only there is allegation against the petitioner for cheating the gullible investors, but during investigation, fake approval letter of Governor of RBI and documents/leaflets relating to promotion of investment in Crypto Currency have been seized from the office of the petitioner and the petitioner, therefore, being one of the principal accused in this case, should not be granted bail.
Page 2 of 55. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, charge-sheet appears to have already been filed, but the investigation also discloses that the petitioner has also initially invested in Crypto Currency, but subsequently, he became one of the member of "Cloud Fut", an organization allegedly dealing with Crypto Currency. Further, the investigation also reveals that the gullible investors have invested through the account of the petitioner who diverted the amount to many other accounts which are still under investigation for the purpose of money trail. The investigation is yet to reveal as how the money has been appropriated and by whom.
6. In the aforesaid situation and facts and taking into consideration the rival submissions and regard being had to the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner, so also the accusations sought to be brought against him and taking into account the pre trial detention of the petitioner in custody since 06.04.2023 with submission of charge- sheet in the meanwhile and failure of the investigating agency to report any criminal antecedent of the petitioner and the punishment that would entail in case of conviction of the petitioner for the offences, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, grants bail to the petitioner.
7. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail Page 3 of 5 on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) 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.229-A of IPC in accordance with law and
(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by giving his present address of stay.
(iv) The Petitioner shall inform the Court as well as the IO as to his place of residence during the trial by providing his mobile number(s), residential address, e-mail, if any, and other documents in support of proof of his residence.
(v) In case the petitioner misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence, proclamation U/S.82 of Cr.P.C. is issued and the petitioner fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the learned trial Court is at liberty to initiate proceeding against him for offence U/S.174-A of the IPC in accordance with law.
(vi) The Petitioner shall appear before the IO as and when required and shall cooperate with the further investigation in the present case.
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 Page 4 of 5 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 grave/similar type of offences on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.
8. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.
(G. Satapathy) Judge Subhasmita Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA DAS Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 06-Feb-2024 14:57:25 Page 5 of 5