Orissa High Court
Nitin Malik vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 16 January, 2024
Author: V. Narasingh
Bench: V. Narasingh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No. 12563 of 2023
Nitin Malik .... Petitioner
Mr. P. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. K.K. Gaya, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER
16.01.2024 Order No.
04. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The Petitioner is an accused in C.T. Case No.36 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court, OPID Act, Cuttack, arising out of E.O.W. P.S. Case No.13 of 2022, for commission of alleged offence under Sections 294/384/420/467/468/471/120-B IPC and Section 66(D) I.T Act.
3. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. Case is pending in any other Court.
4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under the OPID Act, Cuttack by order dated 19.10.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.
4. This is the fourth journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier this Court by order dated 05.04.2023 in BLAPL No.12509 Page 1 of 5 of 2022 & order dated 01.09.2023 in BLAPL No.7461 of 2023 rejected the bail application of the Petitioner.
5. For brevity, the relevant paragraphs of the orders dated 05.04.2023 and 01.09.2023 are extracted hereunder.
Relevant extract of the order dated 05.04.2023 in BLAPL No.12509 of 2022:-
xxx xxx xxx
9. As already noted, the Petitioner is associated with 30 companies which are still under investigation, which according to the learned counsel for the State involves financial transactions to the tune of Rs.15 crores.
10. It is apposite to refer to the recent judgment of the apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another, reported in 2021 (10) SCC 773. The apex Court has laid down the guidelines for release of the accused and noted that "bail is the rule and jail is the exception". Yet it is to be applied cautiously to white colour crimes like the present one.
11. Taking note of the nature of allegation, the investigation being kept open under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C and the specialized nature of investigation which is necessary to get to the root of such cyber crime and since co-accused is the brother of the present Petitioner who is still at large, this Court is not persuaded to accept the submission of the learned counsel that the Petitioner is a victim of the circumstance and his brother evading arrest is the principal accused.
12. On consideration of the role played by the co- accused who has since been released on bail, this Court finds force in the submission of the learned counsel for the State that the role played by the present Petitioner is completely at variance with the role played by the co- accused who was a chartered accountant. Hence, parity cannot be pressed into service in the case at hand."
xxx xxx xxx Page 2 of 5 Relevant extract of the order dated 01.09.2023 in BLAPL No.7461 of 2023:-
xxx xxx xxx
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that one of the ground which weighed with this Court that investigation was kept open and the co-accused who is the brother of the present petitioner was still at large.
6. Paragraph-11 of the earlier order which refers to the submission which has been adverted to by the learned counsel for the petitioner is extracted hereunder for convenience of reference.
"Taking note of the nature of allegation, the investigation being kept open under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C and the specialized nature of investigation which is necessary to get to the root of such cyber crime and since co-accused is the brother of the present Petitioner who is still at large, this Court is not persuaded to accept the submission of the learned counsel that the Petitioner is a victim of the circumstance and his brother evading arrest is the principal accused."
7. It is rudimentary that an order has to be read in its entirety and on a bare perusal of the order of this Court dated 05.04.2023, it can be seen that what weighed with this Court has been detailed therein and it is not only because of the investigation being kept open and the brother of the present petitioner being at large were the sole consideration for rejection of the bail application of the petitioner, as submitted.
8. On consideration of materials on record, this Court is of the prima facie view that there being no change circumstances this matter does not merit further consideration of this Court at this stage. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain the bail application."
xxx xxx xxx
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel that because of long incarceration, the Petitioner may be released on bail.
Page 3 of 57. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the principal accused has been released on bail by this Court by order dated 17.01.2023 in BLAPL No.9766 of 2022. Hence, inter alia on the ground of parity, the Petitioner seeks release.
8. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
9. This Court while rejecting the earlier bail application of the Petitioner had taken note of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench.
10. The Petitioner is an accused in an economic offence. Considering the nature of allegations and the manner in which the Petitioner has associated himself with 30 companies as noted in paragaraph-5 of the order dated 05.04.2023 rejecting his earlier bail application in BLAPL No.12509 of 2022, which is extracted hereunder and there being no change in circumstance, this Court is not inclined to entertain the bail application of the Petitioner.
"5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel, Mr. Pradhan opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner. It is submitted that during the course of investigation it has come to fore that the Petitioner is associated with 30 companies. For ready reference, the same are quoted below:
1. RIGHT START BUSINESS PRIVATE LIMITED
2. GOOD START BUSINESS PRIVATE LIMITED.
3. WINDY TOY HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED
4. YOMOYO BLOSSOM TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED
5. WELL FIN SECURITIES LIMITED
6. WECASH TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED
7. VITE CROISSANCE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED
8. UUCASH TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED
9. TRUTHIGH FINTECH PRIVATE LIMITED.
10. TOUCOLOR TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED.
11. TGHY TRUSTROCK PRIVATE LIMITED
12. TECHDIG FINTECH PRIVATE LIMITED
13. SLEEKWEEK TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED
14. SILVERSKILL TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED
15. SECONDPAY FINTECH PRIVATE LIMITED
16. S L B P FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED
17. RUNNINGBYTE FINANCE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
18. POWERPLAY11 TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED Page 4 of 5
19. LINKTOP HITECH PRIVATE LIMITED
20. JT TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED
21. HUAYE TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
22. HEISEQIAN TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED
23. GOLDEN DIGGER TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED
24. GAMESFINITY PRIVATE LIMITED
25. DIGIVOLUTION CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED
26. DIGITAL GENIUS PRIVATE LIMITED
27. DATTA FINANCE AND TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED
28. BTWO CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED
29. AJAYA SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED
30. CASHBEE TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED"
and prima facie the allegation is against 2 companies, namely, Right Start Business Private Limited and Good Start Business Private Limited at serial nos.1 and 2 respectively in the above lists. Both companies have accounts in HDFC Bank, IDFC Bank and HSBC Bank, of which the present Petitioner is the authorized signatory."
11. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
(V. NARASINGH) Judge Ayesha Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 17-Jan-2024 17:25:39 Page 5 of 5