Orissa High Court
ABLAPL/8933/2020 on 19 August, 2020
Author: A. K. Mishra
Bench: A. K. Mishra
1
ABLAPL No.8933 of 2018
20. 19.08.2020 In view of extra-ordinary situation arose out of COVID-
19 Lockdown, the matter is taken up through video
conferencing.
This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been
made on 11.06.2018 by the petitioners, namely 1)Amrita
Priyadarsini Patra, 2)Pankajini Patra, 3)Pranaya Purnamasi
Patra and 4)Prasanta Kumar Patra apprehending arrest in
connection with Koraput Town P.S. Case No.130 of 2018,
corresponding to G.R. Case No.639 of 2018 of the Court of
learned S.D.J.M., Koraput for offence under Sections 409, 420,
467, 468, 471, 472 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
Heard Mr. S.P. Mishra, learned senior counsel for the
petitioners and learned Addl. Standing Counsel.
Vide order dtd.13.11.2019 privilege U/s.438 Cr.P.C. was
extended in favour of petitioner no.3 - Pranaya Purnamasi
Patra on the ground of solemnization of marriage fixed earlier.
Hence the present order is confined in respect of petitioner
nos.1, 2 and 4 only.
Petitioner nos.2 and 4 are parents of petitioner no.1.
Petitioner no.1 - Amrita Priyadarsini Patra was working as
Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Koraput Branch,
Koraput from 17.10.2016 to 27.11.2017. It is alleged that
during that period she had disbursed loan, secured overdrafts
in favour of loanees without their knowledge. In some cases
DRCs / FDR / SOD were kept by issuing duplicate receipts
without signature and knowledge of deposit receipt holders. In
respect of Koraput Municipality account vide
No.70710201000444 petitioner no.1 had deposited
2
Rs.15,00,264/- stating to be done by mistake and the letter in
this regard purported to be issued by the Municipality
authority bearing No.786 dtd.5.9.2017 was found to be fake
one. It is also alleged that petitioner no.1, as Manager, had
issued loan in favour of her mother petitioner no.2- Pankajini
Patra and sister petitioner no.3 - Pranaya Purnamasi Patra
issuing fake I.D. cards. The loan amount was disbursed
phasewise to the saving account standing in the name of her
father petitioner no.4- Prasana Kumar Patra. Even Rs.4 lakh
was sent to "Bhulaxmi Infratech" on 2.5.2017, Rs.4 lakh to Ms.
Mayank Kumari Deo on 18.5.2017 and Rs.9 lakh to Ms. Latika
Deo. The F.I.R. was lodged by the Regional head of Union Bank
of India, Sambalpur on 5.6.2018.
Learned senior counsel Mr. Mishra submits that all the
FDR receipts are in the Bank and the loan given on those FDR
are already paid to Bank. Loan sanctioned in favour of
petitioner's mother and sister are secured by mortgaging
property and loanees have already paid Rs.14 lakhs. With
regards to transaction in respect of Koraput Municipality, it is
stated that mistake has been regularized and some of the
receipts are misplaced which can be traced out if sincerely
searched.
The investigating officer has filed one affidavit stating
that excluding the loan account, the outstanding loan is
Rs.33,33,002.20 paisa and petitioners are not cooperating with
the investigating officer. Petitioner no.2 - Pankajini Patra
working as teacher is not attending the school. It is specifically
stated by the investigating officer in the affidavit that father of
the petitioner no.1 is a habitual offender having two criminal
cases vide Jeypore Town P.S. Case No.43 of 2020 for offence
U/ss.466, 469 and 471 of I.P.C. and Jeypore Town P.S. Case
3
No.173 dtd.4.9.1993 for offence U/ss.409, 465, 466, 467, 468
and 469 of I.P.C.
Carefully perused the documents filed by the
investigating officer and other materials available on record.
The accusation is grave in nature. The petitioners are not
cooperating with the investigating officer. The father of
petitioner no.1 is involved in two other cases of similar nature.
It is not a mere irregularity.
Regards being had to the above fact, I am of the opinion
that possibility of the petitioners fleeing from justice writs large
so also tampering of evidence. Hence this is not a fit case to
grant anticipatory bail U/s.438 Cr.P.C.
In the result, the prayer for anticipatory bail of
petitioner nos.1, 2 and 4 are hereby rejected.
Accordingly the ABLAPL stands dismissed.
Parties may access copy of this order in Court's official
website and utilize the same as per the Notice No.4587
dtd.25.03.2020 and Notice dtd.15.04.2020 issued by the
Registrar General of this Court. Copies of the aforesaid notices
are available in Court's Official Website.
..............................
Dr. A. K. Mishra, J.
mkp