Orissa High Court
S.K.Jaenul Abedin vs State Of Orissa ... ... Opposite Party on 6 August, 2020
Author: S. K. Panigrahi
Bench: S. K. Panigrahi
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
BLAPL No. 4804 of 2020
S.K.Jaenul Abedin ... ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Orissa ... ... OPPOSITE PARTY
03. 06.08.2020 In view of extraordinary situation arose out of
COVID-19, the matter is taken up through video
conferencing.
Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is in custody in connection with
C.T. Case No.852 of 2020 arising out of Jajpur Road PS
Case No. 261 of 2020, pending in the file of learned
JMFC, Jajpur Road registered for alleged offences under
Section 498(B), 498(C) of IPC.
The prosecution story as per FIR is that on
25.06.2020, when the petitioner had to IBDI Bank for
deposit the business amount of ₹50,000 having
different denominations and while deposited the
amount at Bank Teller counter, the employee received
the cash, sorted out the entire cash and detected that
some of the notes are FICN (Fake Indian Currency
Note). Hence, he informed the matter to the Branch
Manager. After verification, he came to know about the
FICN and submitted the written complaint before the
police station and produced the FICN. During
investigation, the FICN amount to ₹8000 i.e. (₹100
FICN-14 Nos. and ₹200 FICN 0 53 Nos.) having similar
Sl. No. and without any water mark.
2
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is an innocent person except the
statement of the informant, there is no other material
showing the complicity of the petitioner. He further
submitted, if some person has given him during the
course of his business transaction, he had no scope to
verify. But, he cannot be held responsible for this
serious offence. It is further submitted that the
investigation has been substantially progressed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the petitioner is aged about 65 years and he is a
businessman having no such antecedent, this case has
been created in a planted manner and he has been
arrested. It is further submitted that the offences are
triable by Magistrate, he is in custody since 01.07.2020.
The petitioner is having business and landed property
and family members, in the meantime investigation
progressed a lot, in this circumstances, there is no
chance of absconding or tampering with the evidence.
Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed
the bail application of the petitioner.
Considering the submissions made and the facts
and circumstances of the case, there is no clarity on the
complicity of the petitioner in committing such offences,
it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail on
some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just
and proper by the learned JMFC, Jajpur Road in the
aforesaid case with further conditions that:-
1. he shall co-operate with the investigation and
make himself present before the Investigating
Officer as and when required.
3
Violation of any of the aforesaid conditions may
entail consideration for cancellation of the bail granted
to the petitioner.
The Bail Application is accordingly disposed of.
As the Lock-down period is continuing for COVID-
19, learned counsel for the petitioner may utilize the soft
copy of this order available in the High Court's website
or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the
manner prescribed, vide Court's Notice No. 4587 dated
25.03.2020.
.............................
S. K. Panigrahi, J.
AKP