Orissa High Court
Sikandar Kumar vs Central Bureau Of .... Opposite Party on 19 November, 2025
Author: V. Narasingh
Bench: V. Narasingh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.11464 of 2025
Sikandar Kumar .... Petitioner
Mr. B.K. Ragada, Advocate
-versus-
Central Bureau of .... Opposite Party
Investigation
Mr. S. Nayak, Retainer Counsel
(CBI)
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER
Order 19.11.2025 No. 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and
learned Retainer Counsel for the CBI.
2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with DSPE, CBI, ACB P.S Case No. RC09(A)/2024-BBS (RC0152024A0009) of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge CBI Court, Bhubaneswar for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC r/w Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the allegation is related to submission of a forged OMR sheet for getting job as watchman in the FCI. And, it is further submitted by the learned counsel that since Page 1 of 3 the entire allegations are based on documentary evidence, the admitted handwriting having been already collected and send for forensic examination, custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is not warranted.
4. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner on instruction that the Petitioner had in fact appeared twice before the learned I.O. that should weigh with this Court.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the CBI submits that the Petitioner is only one of the accused persons and considering the modality as adopted, the larger conspiracy in obtaining the job has to be probed, and for the same, custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is necessary.
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that in the meanwhile the Petitioner has been dismissed from service and that the same ought to be taken into account by this Court while considering his application for pre-arrest bail.
7. Taking into account the nature of the allegation of manipulation of record for obtaining a job in FCI, and as there are numbers of accused persons and unknown officers of FCI have been cited as accused, this Court is not persuaded to hold that the Petitioner is entitled to the expectational remedy Page 2 of 3 of pre-arrest bail. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre-arrest bail. However, in the event the Petitioner surrenders before the learned Court in seisin in the aforesaid case and moves an application for his release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit.
8. The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
(V. NARASINGH) Judge Jina Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: JINA DIGAL Page 3 of 3 Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 21-Nov-2025 10:15:01