Orissa High Court
Saroj Kumar Prusty vs State Of Odisha ....... Opposite Party on 15 November, 2021
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ODISHA, CUTTACK
BLAPL No. 822 of 2021
Applications under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
in connection with Lalbag P.S. Case No. 294 of 2020
corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1426 of 2020 pending in the
Court of S.D.J.M. (Sadar), Cuttack.
---------------------
Saroj Kumar Prusty ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. Soura Ch. Mohapatra
BLAPL No. 991 of 2021
Lalit Kumar Soni ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. Avijit Pattnaik
BLAPL No. 1400 of 2021
Debasis Hazra ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. Devashis Panda
// 2 //
BLAPL No. 344 of 2021
Pitambar Sahoo ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. Dharanidhar Nayak
Senior Advocate
BLAPL No. 695 of 2021
Pabitra Kumar Behera ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. Dayananda Mohapatra
BLAPL No. 1458 of 2021
Nilima Lenka ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. D.P. Dhal
Senior Advocate
Page 2 of 49
// 3 //
BLAPL No. 1942 of 2021
Ranjan Kumar Behera
@ Bapi ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. Lalitendu Mishra
BLAPL No. 2956 of 2021
Harmohan Dash ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. Saroj Kumar Dash
BLAPL No. 1524 of 2021
Santosh Bhoi ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha ....... Opposite Party
For petitioner: - Mr. B.K. Ragada
For State of Odisha: - Mr. Soubhagya Ketan Nayak
(in all BLAPLs) Addl. Govt. Advocate
Mr. Tapas Kumar Praharaj
Standing Counsel
For the informant: - Mr. Asit Kumar Choudhury
(in all BLAPLs)
---------------------
Page 3 of 49
// 4 //
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
...................................................................................................
Date of Order: 15.11.2021
...................................................................................................
S.K. SAHOO, J. The petitioners in the above bail applications have
approached this Court for bail under section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure in connection with Lalbag P.S. Case No. 294
of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1426 of 2020 pending in
the Court of S.D.J.M. (Sadar), Cuttack in which charge sheet has
been submitted for the offences as indicated below.
Petitioner- Saroj Kumar Prusty - Under section 395 Indian
BLAPL No. 822 of 2021 Penal Code and sections 25
& 27 of Arms Act
Petitioner- Lalit Kumar Soni - Under sections 395, 411,
BLAPL No. 991 of 2021 412, 408, 409, 120-B of the
Indian Penal Code
Petitioner- Debasis Hazra - Under sections 395, 411,
BLAPL No. 1400 of 2021 412, 408, 409, 120-B of the
Indian Penal Code
Petitioner- Pitambar Sahoo - Under section 395 Indian
BLAPL No. 344 of 2021 Penal Code and sections 25
& 27 of Arms Act
Petitioner-Pabitra Kumar - Under sections 395, 412,
Behera 408, 409, 120-B of the
BLAPL No. 695 of 2021 Indian Penal Code
Petitioner- Nilima Lenka - Under section 395 Indian
BLAPL No. 1458 of 2021 Penal Code and sections 25
& 27 of Arms Act
Page 4 of 49
// 5 //
Petitioner- Ranjan Kumar - Under sections 395, 411,
Behera @ Bapi 412, 408, 409, 120-B of the
BLAPL No. 1942 of 2021 Indian Penal Code
Petitioner- Harmohan Dash - Under sections 395, 411,
BLAPL No. 2956 of 2021 412, 408, 409, 120-B of the
Indian Penal Code
Petitioner- Santosh Bhoi - Under sections 395, 412,
BLAPL No. 1524 of 2021 408, 409, 120-B of the
Indian Penal Code
The applications of the petitioners for bail before the
learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Cuttack were rejected as per
orders dated 11.01.2021, 19.01.2021, 01.02.2021, 11.01.2021,
19.01.2021, 15.01.2021, 24.02.2021, 27.01.2021 and
12.02.2021 respectively.
Since all bail applications arise out of one case, with
the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, they are heard
analogously and disposed of by this common order.
2. The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that one
Tapas Ranjan Swain, the Territory Manager of Indian Infoline
Finance Ltd. (hereafter in short, 'IIFL'), a non-banking finance
company incorporated and registered under the provisions of the
Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at IIFL House,
Road No. 16V, Wagle Estate, Thane West and one of their gold
loan branch situated at opposite Q bazaar, Nayasarak, Cuttack
reported before Inspector in-charge, Lalbag police station that on
Page 5 of 49
// 6 //
19.11.2020 at about 9.58 a.m. while their four employees,
namely, Kabi Prasad Pradhan, petitioner Nilima Lenka, Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy and D. Rajesh were opening their gold loan
branch along with their security guard Basant Kumar Behera and
their housekeeping staff Meena Behera, four unknown masked
robbers entered into the branch and forcefully closed the
collapsible gate and shutter from inside. After entering the
branch, the robbers took Lala Amrut Sagar Roy at gun point and
kicked him and physically assaulted him. It is stated that as per
their initial records, approximately thirty nine kilograms of gold,
which valued approximately Rs.17.77 crores (seventeen crores
seventy seven lakhs) excluding the making charges and a cash
of Rs.4.41 lakhs (four lakhs forty one thousand) were taken
away by the robbers from the branch.
On the basis of such first information report, Lalbag
P.S. Case No.294 dated 19.11.2020 was registered under section
395 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25 and 27 of the Arms
Act against unknown persons.
3. During course of investigation, it was found that IIFL
Ltd. is a non-banking financial institution and it has around 1873
branches all over India. IIFL Nayasarak Branch (hereafter
'Company') is one of such branch located under Lalbag Police
Page 6 of 49
// 7 //
Station and it is manned by one Branch Manager, some gold
appraisers, valuers and others. In the higher hierarchy, it was
controlled by one Territory Manager and above him remains one
Area Manager, who was looking after the normal functioning of
the Company. Though some works were being done in the
Company on offline mode and some registers and records were
maintained in the Company but the Company was almost
running on the online mode. It was a loan giving Company
against deposit of gold and taking interest from the public. When
any customer was coming to the Company, he was first coming
in contact with the Customer Care Executive and then he was to
be handled by one appraiser/valuer and if the gold loan terms
was agreed upon by the customer, his photograph was taken,
mobile numbers were shared and the photographs of ornaments
were also taken and then entire documents were transmitted to
the Head Office by the Branch Manager and loan was sanctioned
from the Head office and cash was disbursed to the customers.
The vaults of the Company were maintained by two employees
and its keys used to be rotated among them in every two weeks.
All the security gadgets like CCTV, collapsible gate, audit
mechanism etc. were installed in the Company. It also revealed
during investigation that the employees of the Company could
Page 7 of 49
// 8 //
able to breach all the security norms on one pretext or the other
and nobody could observe the deficit in the surveillance system
and the employees/bankers of the Company could be able to
think the branch to be their paternal and personal property and
made access to the vaults frequently and siphoned everything
from the vaults which was pledged in the Company. First they
breached the security of the vaults by complaining the opening
of the vaults manually instead of the OTP messages and the
company authorities agreed to the same and manual operation
started and by that process, the employees got the license to
frequently enter into and out of the vaults and later on the
kingpin accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy single handedly managed
the vaults and all the employees supported him. Though rotation
of the keys was found on record, but physically accused Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy and petitioner Nilima Lenka handled everything
personally. This gave more scope to the accused persons to take
out the pledged gold from the vaults to outside. The Branch
Manager of the Company did not concentrate on the official
functions of the Company rather relied on the co-accused Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy and he could not explain as to why he was
having no control over the employees and he never reported the
matter to any higher authorities. He not only failed to perform
Page 8 of 49
// 9 //
his official duty as per the guidelines but also being gained over
by accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, he supported the other
accused persons. Accused Nilima Lenka was aware of everything
that was going on in the Company, but she was taking her own
share and keeping mum. All other staffs except the house
keeper, sweeper, guard and newly appointed D. Rajesh were
doing similar things.
The crooked employees hatched criminal conspiracy
and siphoned off the pledged gold from the vaults of the
Company. Accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy could able to manage
the Company by committing theft from the vault and pledged the
same in the same branch again and showed IIFL more numbers
of loan accounts and good business. First, he did the same for
the IIFL company to show business and later when nobody could
notice the same, he started pledging the gold in other branches
with the help of his old customers and opened accounts at other
branches. As gold appraisers, all the employees had the duty to
strengthen the business of the Company and when accused Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy managed in opening new accounts, nobody
opposed him. Though there was a strong audit system in the
Company, nobody recognized the loopholes in the process and
the illegal people became more strengthened and they started
Page 9 of 49
// 10 //
pledging the gold of the Company in other branches. Accused
Lala Amrut Sagar Roy pledged gold of the Company at
Manappuram and took loan against each pledged gold and in
that process earned huge money. He also transferred huge
quantity of gold to other staff of IIFL of his branch and that of his
associates against whose name he pledged loan. He could
cunningly manage the photographs and phone numbers of the
customers and diverted the same in his favour. He had also
access with his school/college friend petitioner Ranjan Kumar
Behera, who acted like his guru and suggestions were taken
from him in the pretext of getting one Hanuman paise. Accused
Lala Amrut Sagar Roy distributed all kinds of resources with his
friends/employees and managed the audit and at times with the
help of petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera. When his brother, who
was working as Manappuram got transferred from the B.K. Road
Branch, accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy approached the new
Branch Manager petitioner Pitambar Sahoo in the pretext of
making new loans and business for his branch and convinced him
to help in this unlawful act and the petitioner Pitambar Sahoo
also helped him and both of them conspired together and
pledged the gold committing theft from the Company. Even the
Page 10 of 49
// 11 //
petitioner Pitambar Sahoo availed the loan in favour of his
mother and brother.
The investigation further revealed that in the
process, huge loan amount was to be paid every month and
when it became difficult for the management of the branch to
manage things, being scared of being caught in the audit,
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy has no option but to contact
petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera to come out of this and both
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, Rajkishore Sahoo, petitioners
Ranjan Kumar Behera, and Harmohan Dash conspired together
in a feast organized at Baideswar temple at Choudwar where
they decided to stage a dacoity in the Company to show the
robbed gold to have been taken by the dacoits. Accused Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy also moved to Bilahat area and interacted with
other stake holders of the dacoity team and made the plan. As
per the plan, the dacoits again congregated at Nanda factory of
petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera at Bilahat in the evening hours
of 18.11.2020 and got prepared. The petitioner Ranjan Kumar
Behera gave his bike to Rajkishore Sahoo and petitioner Pabitra
Kumar Behera brought his bike and they both tampered with the
number plates of their bikes using black tapes and contacted
each other and confirmed it to accused Lala. On getting
Page 11 of 49
// 12 //
confirmation, accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy took huge quantity
of gold from the vaults and kept at Petanal area in anticipation of
dacoity as his share much earlier to the occurrence as he was
expecting that others would be benefitted in the process and he
might not get anything after dacoity. As per their planning,
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy asked them to come to Cuttack
and provided them a plastic gun and the team of four accused
persons namely Rajkishore Sahoo, Prakash Kumar Sahoo
petitioners Pabitra Kumar Behera and Santosh Bhoi reached at
Cuttack and committed the crime in two bikes wearing masks
and also departed from Cuttack. The petitioner Ranjan Kumar
Behera, who was the mastermind of the dacoity, was waiting
nearby and assured all others to come to their help in case of
any kind of necessity. Later on everyone took their respective
shares and deposited the lion's share with the petitioner Ranjan
Kumar Behera.
During course of investigation, robbed booties were
recovered from each of the dacoits and also during interrogation,
the disclosure of the earlier misappropriation came to light. On
that aspect, the investigation focused and the entire things came
to light. In course of conducting criminal breach of trust in the
Company, the employees of the Company associated with the
Page 12 of 49
// 13 //
accused persons, i.e. petitioners Lalit Kumar Soni, Saroj Kumar
Prusty, Harmohan Dash, Debasis Hazra, Pitambar Sahoo and
others. On receipt of the orders of DCP, the Investigating Officer
submitted first charge sheet against the petitioners on
23.03.2021 under different offences as aforesaid, keeping the
investigation open under section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure awaiting collection of more oral, written and
documentary evidence in the case.
4. Accusation against the petitioner Saroj Kumar Prusty
(BLAPL No. 822 of 2021):
During the course of investigation, it is revealed that
the petitioner Saroj Kumar Prusty was having a jewellery shop,
namely, 'Renuka Jewellery' under Mangalabag police station and
he was coming to the Company and taking loan in case of
necessity by pledging gold and later he conspired with accused
Lala, petitioner Nilima Lenka, Satyam and others to take loan
illegally by re-pledging the gold of IIFL both at Nayasarak Branch
and in Manappuram creating series of gold loan accounts in his
name using his own KYC. In the Company, there were 58 (fifty
eight) gold loan accounts in his name, out of which huge cash up
to the tune of several lakhs of rupees were taken and 127 fake
gold loan accounts were created in his name in Manappuram in
Page 13 of 49
// 14 //
which more than Rs.14 lakhs (fourteen lakhs) were taken as loan
and every time cash transaction was preferred than cashless
transaction in order to suppress digital evidence taking the plea
of cashless transaction beyond rupees two lakhs. The fake
accounts in the name of the petitioner were tracked at
Manappuram belonging to the Company. It is also transpired that
in the identification process, the gold ornaments pledged at the
Company in the name of Nikhil Kumar Dey was found in the
name of the petitioner at Manappuram and the bank transaction
was made from the ICICI Bank account of accused Lala Amrut
Sagar Roy to the account of the petitioner for Rs.1,45,037/- and
the petitioner used his own mobile phone numbers to get new
loans pledging the gold of the vaults of the Company in his own
name in connivance with the other employees and agents and
received loan of huge amount to that effect and also received
SMS from the receiver of IIFL regarding premium payment and
over passed the same as his loans were getting renewed from
time to time by the employees creating new loan accounts
merging the old one.
During the course of investigation, 162.400 grams of
gold was seized from Manappuram pledged in the name of the
petitioner and the audit and identification of gold items seized
Page 14 of 49
// 15 //
from the account of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy corresponded
to the original accounts of Nikhil Kumar Dey vide Sl. Nos. 61 and
62 and Sl. No.132 Vinod Singh was found to be in the name of
the petitioner. The investigation further revealed that an amount
of Rs.1,45,037/- (one lakh forty five thousand and thirty seven)
has been transferred from the ICICI bank account of accused
Lala Amrut Sagar Roy to Bandhan Bank Account. It was also
revealed during investigation that multiple loan accounts were
created in the name of the petitioner with details including phone
numbers, amount pledged, the identity of customer and year of
pledging, amount disbursed etc. both in the Company as well as
in Manappuram.
During the course of investigation, the confessional
statement of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy regarding deposit of
gold at Manappuram by the petitioner got corroborated by the
statements of Area Manager Sameer Debnath, Deepak Kumar
Sahoo and Sitanshu Sekhar Ota. It is also revealed from the
statements of Nikhil Kumar Dey and Vinod Singh regarding
identification of their pledged gold in the account of the
petitioner. Independent witnesses namely, Santosh Kumar
Sahoo and Sumit Dutta also stated regarding involvement of the
petitioner in the alleged occurrence.
Page 15 of 49
// 16 //
Accusation against the petitioner Lalit Kumar Soni (BLAPL
No. 991 of 2021):
During the course of investigation, it is revealed that
the petitioner Lalit Kumar Soni was having a jewellery shop,
namely, 'Jasoda Jewellery' under Purighat Police Station and he
used to come to the Company and taking loan in case of
necessity by pledging gold and later on he conspired with
accused Lala, petitioner Nilima Lenka, Satyam and others to take
loan illegally by re-pledging the gold both in the Company and in
Manappuram creating series of gold loan accounts in his name
using his own KYC. In the Company, there are 67 gold loan
accounts in the name of petitioner, out of which huge cash to the
tune of several lakhs of rupees were availed. Fourteen fake gold
loan accounts were created in the name of the petitioner in
Manappuram from which more than rupees twenty four lakhs
were taken as loan. Every time cash transaction was preferred
than cashless transaction in order to suppress digital evidence
taking the plea of cashless transaction beyond two lakhs and
huge loan incurred by the petitioner was given to accused Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy in cash and some amount was retained by him
and an Audi Car was also gifted by the petitioner to accused Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy. Cash of Rs.2,36,000/- (two lakhs thirty six
thousand) and one Vivo mobile phone were seized from the
Page 16 of 49
// 17 //
petitioner. The investigation further revealed that fake accounts
in the name of the petitioner was tracked at Manappuram
belonging to the Company and bank transaction was made from
accused Lala's ICICI bank account to the account of the
petitioner to the tune of Rs.14,72,796/- (fourteen lakhs seventy
two thousand seven hundred ninety six). In the identification
process, the gold ornaments pledged at the Company belonging
to Manas Kumar Rout, petitioner Saroj Kumar Prusty, Dhanjay
Dagra, Soumya Ranjan Muduli, Sukanta Mohanty, Venktesh
Sethi were found in the name of the petitioner at Manappuram in
different loan accounts. The petitioner used his own mobile
phone to get new loans by pledging the gold of the Company in
his own name in connivance with the other employees and
agents and received loans of huge amount to that effect and also
received SMS from the server of IIFL regarding premium
payment and over passed the same as his loans were getting
renewed from time to time by the employees creating new loan
accounts merging the old one. From the call detail reports, it
appears that there were frequent telephonic contracts from each
of the phone numbers of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy to the
petitioner.
Page 17 of 49
// 18 //
During investigation, the Investigating Officer seized
795.600 grams of gold from the Manappuram pledged in the
name of the petitioner and seized one Audi Car from Lala Amrut
Sagar Roy gifted by the petitioner as per payment made. There
was also a seizure of cash of Rs.2,36,000/- (two lakhs thirty six
thousand) with a mobile phone from the petitioner.
During investigation, it was revealed that the gold
items seized from the accounts of Lala correspond to be original
accounts of Manas Kumar Rout, petitioner Saroj Kumar Prusty,
Dhanjay Dagra, Soumya Ranjan Muduli, Sukanta Mohanty,
Venktesh Sethi and it was found in the name of petitioner Lalit
Kumar Soni at Manappuram. The investigation further revealed
that huge amount has been transferred from the account of
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy to the account of the petitioner.
During investigation, multiple loan accounts with details
including phone numbers, amount pledged, the identity of
customer and year of pledging, amount disbursed etc. both of
the Company and Manappuram were found.
The confessional statement of accused Lala Amrut
Sagar Roy regarding deposit of gold at Manappuram by the
petitioner got corroborated by the statements of Area Manager
Sameer Debnath, Deepak Kumar Sahoo and Sitanshu Sekhar
Page 18 of 49
// 19 //
Ota. The witnesses, namely, Manas Kumar Rout, Dhanjay Kumar
Dagra and Venktesh Sethi identified their pledged gold in the
account of petitioner. The witnesses, namely, Santosh Kumar
Sahoo & Sumit Dutta stated about seizure of cash of Rs.2.36
lakhs (two lakhs thirty six thousand) from the petitioner.
Accusation against the petitioner Debasish Hazra (BLAPL
No. 1400 of 2021):
During the course of investigation, the Investigating
Officer found that the petitioner Debasish Hazra was having no
ostensible means of occupation and he was working as an agent
of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, petitioner Nilima, Satyam and
others and taking loan in case of necessity by pledging gold of
the Company and later on he conspired with accused Lala Amrut
Sagar Roy, petitioner Nilima Lenka, Satyam and others to take
loan illegally by re-pledging the gold of the Company and
Manappuram creating series of gold loan accounts in his name
using his own KYC. The investigation further revealed that there
were twelve gold loan accounts in the name of petitioner, out of
which huge cash to the tune of more than rupees ten lakhs was
taken and forty nine fake gold loan accounts were created in the
name of petitioner in Manappuram in which more than rupees
seventy seven lakhs was taken as loan and every time cash
transaction was preferred than cashless transaction in order to
Page 19 of 49
// 20 //
suppress digital evidence taking the plea of cashless transaction
beyond rupees two lakhs. The investigation further revealed that
as the petitioner was working as an agent of the accused Lala
Amrut Sagar Roy, he was gifted with the personal bike of
accused Lala and the same was also seized from the petitioner
during his arrest and the same was utilized by him on behalf of
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy as his agent. During investigation,
the Investigating Officer collected CDR data, which was matching
with the location of the accused persons with their frequent
conversations, which proved criminal conspiracy among them.
The investigation further revealed that fake accounts in the
name of the petitioner were tracked at Manappuram belonging to
the Company and one kilogram and one hundred fifteen grams
of gold was seized at Manappuram. The investigation further
revealed that bank transaction was made from accused Lala's
ICICI bank account to the account of the petitioner for
Rs.3,00,999/- (three lakhs nine hundred ninety nine). During the
identification process, the gold ornaments pledged at the
Company belonged to Shyamsundar Ghosh, Kirti Ch. Samal,
Dhananjaya Ku Dagra, Asit Ku. Sahu, Sumanta Mulia and others
including the petitioner Saroj Kumar Prusty were found to have
been pledged in the name of the petitioner at Manappuram. The
Page 20 of 49
// 21 //
investigation further revealed that petitioner used his own mobile
phone and with other phones to get the new loans by pledging
the gold of the Company in his own name in connivance with the
other employees and agents and received loans of huge amount
and also received SMS from the server of IIFL regarding
premium payment and over passed the same as his loans were
getting renewed from time to time by the employees creating
new loan accounts merging the old one.
During the course of investigation, 1Kg. 115 grams
of gold was seized from Manappuram pledged in the name of the
petitioner and one CBZ bike was also seized from his possession.
The investigation further revealed that the gold items seized
from the account of accused Lala corresponded to the original
account of the customers of the Company, namely, Shamsundar
Ghosh, Kirti Ch. Samal, Dhanjaya Ku. Dagara, Asit Ku. Sahu,
Sumanta Mulia and others including the petitioner Debasish
Hazra was found in the name of the petitioner Saroj Prusty at
Manappuram. The investigation further revealed that an amount
of Rs.3,00,999/- was transferred from the account of accused
Lala Amrut Sagar Roy to the account of the petitioner and
multiple loan accounts of the petitioner with details including
phone numbers, amount pledged, amount disbursed etc. were
Page 21 of 49
// 22 //
found to have been created both in the Company as well as at
Manappuram.
Confessional statement of accused Lala Amrut Sagar
Roy implicating the petitioner regarding deposit of gold at
Manappuram stood corroborated from the statements of Area
Manager Sameer Debnath, Deepak Kumar Sahoo and Sitanshu
Sekhar Ota. The witnesses namely, Shyamsundar Ghosh, Kirti
Ch. Samal, Dhanjay Kumar Dagra, Asit Kumar Sahu, Sumanta
Mulia and others also stated regarding identification of their
pledged gold in the account of petitioner. The independent
witnesses, namely, Girija Prasad Sahoo & Ankit Agarwal also
stated regarding involvement of petitioner in the alleged
occurrence.
Accusation against the petitioner Pitambar Sahoo (BLAPL
No. 344 of 2021):
During investigation, on the disclosure made by the
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, seizure of gold in 20 nos. of
customers loan account was made at Manappuram which were
created by the petitioner Pitambar Sahoo as Branch Manager of
Manappuram. He pledged these jewellery in connivance with the
employees of the Company such as accused Lala Amrut Sagar
Roy, petitioner Nilima Lenka, Satyam Pradhan and others from
where stolen/misappropriated ornaments of the Company to the
Page 22 of 49
// 23 //
tune of 6 kgs 439 grams were recovered in presence of the
petitioner, Area Manager, Zonal Manager of Manappuram and
other witnesses. It is also revealed that multiple gold loan
accounts were created in the branch by pledging the stolen/
misappropriated gold of the Company in the name of different
customers/agents of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, petitioner
Nilima Lenka, Satyam Pradhan and others of the Company with
the assistance of the petitioner for which the loan accounts of
fake loan account holders were seized. The investigation further
revealed that by pledging the gold, huge loan was sanctioned by
the petitioner as the Branch Manager of Manappuram and
misappropriated and siphoned off to the tune of crores of rupees
and the same has been distributed among the unscrupulous
people with their unholy nexus hatching a criminal conspiracy
thereby cheating both the companies, i.e. IIFL and Manappuram
causing huge pecuniary loss to them. The stolen gold of the
Company pledged in the names of Amresh Das, Anisha Khatun,
Rabindra Kumar Sahoo, Nikhil Kumar Dey were pledged in the
name of Nityananda Sahoo (brother of the petitioner Pitambar
Sahoo) and that of Anurag Tiberwal and others were pledged in
the name of Golap Sahoo (mother of Pitambar Sahoo). The
original phone number and photograph etc. were provided by the
Page 23 of 49
// 24 //
family members of the petitioner and some other gold loan
account holders genuinely with their direct knowledge with the
intention of grabbing the cash released out of the pledged gold.
The investigation further revealed that for opening of an account,
the OTP generated from the system of company was shared with
the bankers to facilitate gold loan and the subsequent message
regarding payment of premium etc. was also communicated
through SMS in those mobile phones and unless there was
criminal conspiracy, congregation and connivance among all the
accused persons with the petitioner being the Branch Manager of
Manappuram, it would not have been possible for the family
members of the petitioner, staff of the Company and others to
avail the gold loan and thus the petitioner played a key role in
the entire episode. It is further revealed during verification of
KYC and loan documents that the photograph of the petitioner
was visible in the loan account of his bother, namely, Nityananda
Sahoo and the same has been created fraudulently. The
investigation further revealed that accused Lala has paid an
amount of Rs.13,54,191/- to Manapurram Branch through IMPS,
which was in the good knowledge of the petitioner for repayment
of premium against fake loan account made in order to show the
accounts alive thereby nobody could suspect him and those
Page 24 of 49
// 25 //
accounts would not be put to auction. The investigation further
revealed that from the call detail reports, it was found that there
was frequent telephonic communication between the accused
Lala Amrut Sagar Roy and the petitioner, which was also another
proof of their conspiracy and attachment on regular basis.
During the course of investigation, 6 Kg 439 gram of
gold was seized from the Manappuram pledged in the name of
20 nos. of account holders including that of the co-accused
persons in this case. The investigation further revealed that gold
items seized from the account of Nityananda Sahoo (brother of
the petitioner Pitambar Sahoo) at Manappuram corresponded to
the original accounts of Amresh Das, Anisha Khatun, Rabindra
Kumar Sahoo, Sangeeta Saha, Sofia Parwin, Nikhil Kumar Dey,
which were pledged by them in the Company. Similarly gold
items seized from the account of Golap Sahu (mother of
Pitamber Sahoo) at Manapurram branch corresponded to the
original accounts of Anurag Tiberwal and others of the company.
It is also revealed that multiple loan accounts with details
including phone numbers, amount of gold pledged, the identity
of customer and year of pledging, amount disbursed etc. have
been created at Manappuram in respect of Nityananda Sahoo
and Golap Sahu. The investigation further revealed that on
Page 25 of 49
// 26 //
verification of the customer history details in the loan application
in respect of Nityananda Sahoo, the photograph of the petitioner
appeared.
The witnesses, namely, Sameer Debnath, Moppala Raju,
Deepak Kumar Sahoo and Sitanshu Sekhar Ota have stated
regarding production of gold for seizure, which was deposited by
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy with the help of the petitioner in
Manappuram. The witnesses namely, Basanta Kumar Behera and
Meena Behera, who are the employees of the Company also
stated regarding involvement of the petitioner and the main
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy.
Accusation against the petitioner Pabitra Kumar Behera
(BLAPL No. 695 of 2021):
During course of investigation, on the basis of
confessional statement of the petitioner Santosh Bhoi, the
petitioner Pabitra Kumar Behera was arrested and on the basis of
his confessional statement recorded under section 27 Indian
Evidence Act, stolen gold ornaments of the Company weighing
about 108.140 grams were recovered from his possession, which
were in identifiable polythene packet of the Company. Among
the seized gold, one item was identified to have been pledged
gold of one customer of the company, namely, Sumanta Kumar
Page 26 of 49
// 27 //
Mulia, who identified his property from the seized gold. During
the course of investigation, a Bajaj Pulsar bike with fake number
of the petitioner belonging to him vide Registration No.OD-05-U-
2040 and other incriminating materials such as one Realme
Smartphone, Mi android, one Jio keypad phone, one Samsung
Duos mobile phone and the wearing apparels used during the
commission of crime were recovered from his house. On the
basis of the CCTV footage relating to the operation, inspection of
the seized vehicle used in the crime was conducted by MVI of
RTO, Cuttack, who opined the registration number was tampered
with and from the chassis number of the bike, it was ascertained
that the vehicle was registered in the name of the petitioner and
the same was used in the crime, which is evident from the CCTV
footage. It is also revealed from the statements of witnesses that
petitioner along with others were present at Bell view chhak. The
investigation further revealed that the petitioner was maintaining
a lavish life style in the village, which created a suspicion about
his activities.
During the course of investigation, the Investigating
Officer relied upon the statements of the witnesses namely,
Soumya Subhadarsan, Sumit Dutta, Ashutosh Parida, Naresh
Sahu, Sandeep Behera, Sambit Kumar Das and Abinash Parida
Page 27 of 49
// 28 //
and others. The Investigating Officer also seized the
memorandum of identification in respect of the petitioner, which
corresponded to be the original accounts of Sumanta Kumar
Mulia, a customer of the Company.
Accusation against the petitioner Nilima Lenka (BLAPL No.
1458 of 2021):
During course of investigation, on the basis of
statements of other accused persons regarding the complicity of
the petitioner Nilima Lenka in the crime, she was arrested and
her confessional statement was recorded and she gave the
recovery of stolen gold ornaments of the Company of about 90
grams along with cash of Rs.53,700/-, one Redmi mobile phone
from her house. During the course of investigation, the
Investigating Officer seized a fixed deposit certificate of
Rs.7,00,000/- made in the joint name of the petitioner and one
Allad Roshan Kiran, the fiancé of the petitioner, which was
invested by the petitioner soon after her marriage was fixed and
after the petitioner was arrested, the said Federal Bank account
was converted to a single account. The investigation further
revealed regarding transaction of an amount of Rs.1,69,310/-
from account of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy to the account of
the petitioner. The investigation further revealed that the
Page 28 of 49
// 29 //
petitioner was the key holder of the vaults of the Company along
with kingpin accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy apart from her
regular turn and she had uninterrupted access to the vaults of
the Company and was aware of the transfer of the gold from the
vaults since long. The investigation further revealed that the
petitioner was also aware about the staged commission of
dacoity in the bank prior to the occurrence and had telephonic
conversation with one of the dacoits, namely, Ranjan Kumar
Behera, which was operated in the Company at the instance of
the accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy and petitioner Ranjan Kumar
Behera. It is also revealed during the investigation that apart
from accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, the petitioner was present
and helped the dacoits to carry away the gold packets from the
vaults of the Company, but pretended about the robbery. The
investigation further revealed that the petitioner had helped in
pledging the gold of the Company by creating loan for accused
Prakash Kumar Sahoo and Raj Kishore Sahoo. The investigation
further revealed that gold loan accounts were created in the
names of Raj Kishore Sahoo and Prakash Kumar Sahoo at
Manappuram with the active knowledge of the petitioner. From
the call detail reports of petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera, it
Page 29 of 49
// 30 //
revealed that he was having conversation with the petitioner
prior to the occurrence.
The witnesses namely, Basanta Kumar Behera and
Meena Behera, who are the employees of the Company also
stated regarding involvement of the petitioner and the main
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy. The statements of gold
customers, namely, Anurag Tiberwal, Asit Kumar Sahoo also
indicated regarding the implication of the petitioner in shifting
their gold from the Company to Manappuram in connivance with
the accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy.
Accusation against the petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera
(BLAPL No. 1942 of 2021):
During course of investigation, on the basis of the
statement of the accused petitioner Santosh Bhoi, the petitioner
Ranjan Kumar Behera @ Bapi was arrested and on the basis of
his confessional statement, gold ornaments weighing about 2
kgs. 12 grams were recovered, which belonged to the Company
along with other articles. The investigation further revealed that
the recovered gold ornaments were identified by the customers
of the Company, namely, Prakash Mahapatra, Monalisha Mulia,
Manoj Karmakar, Sanjaya Kumar Moda, Sunil Kumar Sethi,
Shyamsundar Ghosh. The petitioner made criminal conspiracy at
Page 30 of 49
// 31 //
his NANDA factory with accused Raj Kishore Sahoo, Prakash
Chandra Sahoo and petitioner Pabitra Behera by tampering the
registration number of the bikes and provided his own Honda
Dream Yoga bike for commission of dacoity, which was used by
accused Raju and Santosh. The investigation further revealed
that prior to the commission of the offence, the petitioner,
petitioner Harmohan Dash, accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy,
accused Raj Kishore Sahoo along with some friends of accused
Lala Amrut Sagar Roy congregated together at Baideswar
Temple at Choudwar and hatched a criminal conspiracy to
commit dacoity in the Company to help accused Lala Amrut
Sagar Roy and others in order to save them from audit. The
congregation of the petitioner with others at Choudwar prior to
the occurrence also fortified from the statement of temple priest
and call detail reports. It is also revealed during investigation
that an amount of Rs.4,96,604/- was transferred to the account
of the petitioner by the accused Lala.
The witnesses, namely, Shyamsundar Ghosh, Asit
Kumar Sahu, Soumya Sinha identified their pledged gold in the
Company, which were recovered from the possession of the
petitioner. The statements of the independent witnesses,
namely, Jayanta Panda and Kailash Ch. Panda, who are the
Page 31 of 49
// 32 //
priests of the temple, revealed regarding the conspiracy made
by the present petitioner along with others prior to the
occurrence.
Accusation against the petitioner Harmohan Dash (BLAPL
No. 2956 of 2021):
During the course of investigation, it is revealed that
the petitioner Harmohan Dash was the key conspirator in the
case and he knew accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy since 2011
while working as Security Guard at IIFL, Bajrakabati Road and
later he became security supervisor, however he continued to
come in contact with accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, petitioner
Nilima Lenka, Satyam and others at the Company and usually
brought people to produce their KYC for creating fake gold loan
accounts. He was having a series of gold loan accounts both in
the Company and in Mannpuram Gold Loan Finance Company at
Choudhury Bazar Branch. During the course of investigation,
28.700 grams of gold was seized from Manapurram Gold Loan
Finance Company at Choudhury Bazar Branch pledged in his
name. It was also revealed that prior to the commission of the
offence, the petitioner along with accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy,
petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera, accused Raj Kishore Sahoo and
some friends of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy met each other at
Page 32 of 49
// 33 //
Baideswar Temple at Choudwar and hatched the criminal
conspiracy to commit dacoity in the Company to help the
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy and others to save them from
audit. It was also revealed from the statements of the temple
priests as well as the CDR data matching with location of
accused persons was collected specifying their presence at
Choudwar on 17.11.2020. The investigation further revealed that
out of the illegal money incurred by petitioner Harmohan Dash
through accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, he invested the same by
purchasing two cars, one Maruti Swift VDI and Maruti Ertiga Car,
which have been seized. It is also revealed during investigation
that the said two cars were used to transport the accused
persons to Baideswar temple for hatching criminal conspiracy,
which fact was admitted by accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy and
other accused persons. It is also revealed during investigation
that an amount of Rs.2,20,054/- was transferred to the SB
account of the petitioner by the accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy.
The investigation further revealed that the petitioner used to
procure different persons from other areas to give employment
in his security agency but used their documents with the help of
the employees of the Company to avail loan by creating fake
gold loan accounts. This fact is also fortified from the statements
Page 33 of 49
// 34 //
of Lipun Behera and Suman Mandal in connection with Lalbag
P.S. Case No.308/2021. The statements of the witnesses,
namely, Deepak Kumar Sahoo, Sitanshu Sekhar Ota, Lila
Baiduria Patra, Bijaya Ku. Mahapatra indicate regarding seizure
of gold illegally removed from the Company and pledged at
Manappuram. The statements of the witnesses, namely, Sumit
Dutta, Santosh Sahoo, Santosh Kumar Saha and Kailash Ch.
Mahanty revealed regarding the conspiracy of the petitioner and
others in the crime.
Accusation against the petitioner Santosh Bhoi @ Bapi
(BLAPL No. 1524 of 2021):
During the course of investigation, it is revealed that
being directed by the petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera as per the
instruction of accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, the petitioner
Santosh Bhoi along with three others came from Bilahata,
Biswanathpur, Kisannagar in two bikes to commit dacoity in the
Company. The investigation further revealed that for commission
of the crime, the petitioner Pabitra Kumar Behera and Prakash
Sahoo used one Pulsar bike, which belonged to the petitioner
Pabitra Kumar Behera and accused Raj Kishore Sahoo and the
petitioner used another Honda Dream Yoga by using fake
number plates by tampering the registration numbers using Cello
Page 34 of 49
// 35 //
tapes. The investigation further revealed that both the bikes with
fake number plates were utilized in the commission of the crime
and those were recovered at the instance of the petitioner and
others, which was evident from the CCTV footage and the
ownership of the bikes as per the report of the M.V.I, R.T.O.,
Cuttack. The petitioner was duly identified in the photo T.I.
parade, which was conducted in the presence of the Executive
Magistrate. The investigation further revealed that after
establishing the identity of petitioner, his house search was
conducted and stolen gold ornaments of the Company weighing
about 46.390 grams were recovered at his instance being
wrapped in the polythene pouch of the Company. During the
course of investigation, on the basis of his confessional
statement, the wearing apparels such as cap used at the time of
commission of offence was seized, which correlated with the
CCTV footage. It is also revealed during investigation that there
was frequent communication between the petitioner with other
accused persons regarding the criminal conspiracy at village
Bilahat. It is also revealed from the statements of witnesses that
the petitioner along with others was present at Bell view chhak.
The investigation further revealed that the petitioner being an
Auto driver was maintaining a lavish life style in the village,
Page 35 of 49
// 36 //
which created a suspicion about his activities. It was also
revealed during investigation that the petitioner was the pillion
rider with the accused Rajkishore Sahu for committing dacoity.
The statement of the witness Ashutosh Pradhan also revealed
the presence of the petitioner with accused Lala Amrut Sagar
Roy at Bell view Chhak. The statements of the witnesses,
namely, Nageswar Behera, Kulamani Behera, Soumya
Subhadarsan and Sumit Dutta indicate regarding the seizure of
robbed gold of the company recovered from the petitioner and
others. The independent witnesses, namely, Rohit Bala and
Deepak Kumar Behera are the identifying witnesses of accused
petitioner.
The Investigating Officer submitted first charge sheet
on 23.03.2021 against the petitioners under different sections of
the Indian Penal Code and other offences as already stated
above keeping the investigation open.
5. Mr. Soura Chandra Mohapatra, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner Saroj Kumar Prusty in BLAPL No.
822 of 2021 submitted that the petitioner is a jewellery shop
owner and he is in judicial custody since 27.11.2020. He had
availed some loan for his business purpose and he was not
instrumental in the fake gold loan accounts opened in his name
Page 36 of 49
// 37 //
and there is no clinching materials available on record to show
that the petitioner had connived with the co-accused persons
either in the misappropriation of ornaments of the customers
pledged in the Company to avail gold loan or in the staged
dacoity and therefore, the bail application may be favourably
considered particularly when first charge sheet has already been
submitted and all the relevant documents have been seized and
there is no chance of absconding of the petitioner.
Mr. Avijit Patnaik, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner Lalit Kumar Soni in BLAPL No. 991 of 2021 submitted
that the petitioner is a jewellery shop owner and he is in judicial
custody since 24.11.2020 and there is no clinching materials on
record to show that the petitioner had connived with the co-
accused persons in the misappropriation of ornaments of the
customers pledged in the Company to avail the gold loan or in
the commission of dacoity and he was not aware about the
opening of fake gold loan accounts in his name and therefore,
the bail application may be favourably considered.
Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner Debasish Hazra in BLAPL No. 1400 of 2021
submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since
01.12.2020. He further submitted that the petitioner was never
Page 37 of 49
// 38 //
working as an agent of the accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy and
the petitioner Nilima Lenka, rather loan accounts were opened in
his name by the said accused persons without his knowledge and
lakhs of rupees were misappropriated collusively by those
accused persons and the petitioner has got no role in the entire
transaction. It is further submitted that there is no clinching
materials on record to show that the petitioner had connived
with those co-accused persons in the misappropriation of
ornaments of the customers pledged in the Company to avail
gold loan and therefore, the bail application may be favourably
considered.
Mr. Dharanidhar Nayak, learned Senior Advocate
appearing for the petitioner Pitambar Sahoo submitted that the
petitioner was the Branch Manager of Manappuram and he is in
judicial custody since 26.11.2020. It is further contended that
the main allegations are against co-accused Lala Amrut Sagar
Roy and petitioner Nilima Lenka, who were processing all the
documentation works relating to grant of gold loan of the
customers in the Company and sanction used to be made to the
loan from the Head Office and thereafter cash was getting
disbursed to the customers. It is further contended that there is
no clinching materials on record to show that the petitioner had
Page 38 of 49
// 39 //
connived with those co-accused persons in the misappropriation
of ornaments of the customers pledged in the Company to avail
gold loan and he was also not aware that the pledged gold in
Manappuram was the pledged gold in the operative accounts of
the Company and therefore, the bail application may be
considered favourably.
Mr. Dayananda Mohapatra, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner Pabitra Mohan Behera in BLAPL No.
695 of 2021 submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody
since 24.11.2020 and he has got no criminal antecedent and he
has not participated in the stage managed dacoity, which was
organized by accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy. It is further
contended that the allegation regarding recovery of 108.140
grams of gold ornaments kept in the cover of the Company from
the possession of the petitioner is not borne out from the seizure
list attached to the charge sheet. Learned counsel further
contended that proper photo identification of the ornaments has
not been made and the petitioner was not a party to the
conspiracy stated to have been held at Baideswar Temple,
Choudwar. It is further contended that the petitioner is a daily
wage earner and there is no clinching material on record to show
that the petitioner is in any way involved in the misappropriation
Page 39 of 49
// 40 //
of ornaments pledged in the Company and therefore, the bail
application may be favourably considered.
Mr. D.P.Dhal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for
the petitioner Nilima Lenka in BLAPL No. 1458 of 2021 argued
that the petitioner was working as a gold appraiser of the
Company and she is in judicial custody since 25.11.2020. It is
further contended that the petitioner is an unmarried lady and
was working in the Company since long and the alleged
occurrence has taken place beyond her knowledge. It is further
argued that the offence under section 395 of the Indian Penal
Code is not attracted against the petitioner. It is further
submitted that the allegation of the prosecution that she helped
the dacoits in robbing away the gold pouch is not correct and she
has been falsely entangled in the case. It is further contended
that though in the charge sheet, it is mentioned that the
petitioner was aware about the activities going on in the
Company by the co-accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy and that she
had failed to discharge her official duty, but there is no clinching
materials on record to show that the petitioner had connived
with those co-accused persons in the misappropriation of
ornaments of the customers pledged in the Company to avail
Page 40 of 49
// 41 //
gold loan and therefore, the bail application may be favourably
considered.
Mr. Lalitendu Mishra, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera @ Bapi in BLAPL No. 1942 of
2021 submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since
25.11.2020. He further submitted that the petitioner has got no
criminal antecedents and there are no material regarding his
involvement in the commission of dacoity. It is further contended
that the allegation regarding recovery of robbed gold of the
Company from the possession of the petitioner is not borne out
of the seizure list attached to the charge sheet. Learned counsel
further contended that the petitioner was not a party to the
conspiracy held at Baideswar Temple, Choudwar. It is further
submitted that there is no clinching materials on record to show
that the petitioner is in any way involved in the misappropriation
of ornaments pledged in the Company and therefore, the bail
application may be favourably considered.
Mr. Saroj Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner Harmohan Dash in BLAPL No. 2956 of 2021
submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since
25.11.2020. He further submitted that the petitioner has got no
criminal antecedents and there is no material regarding his
Page 41 of 49
// 42 //
involvement in the commission of alleged dacoity and there is no
clinching materials on record to show that the petitioner is in any
way involved in the misappropriation of ornaments pledged in
the Company and therefore, the bail application may be
favourably considered.
Mr. B.K. Ragada, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner Santosh Bhoi in BLAPL No. 1524 of 2021 submitted
that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 25.11.2020. He
further submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal
antecedents and there are no materials regarding his
involvement in the commission of dacoity. It is further contended
that the allegation regarding recovery of robbed gold of the
Company from the possession of the petitioner is not borne out
of the record. Learned counsel further contended that the
petitioner was not a party to the conspiracy held at Baideswar
Temple, Choudwar. It is further submitted that there is no
clinching materials on record to show that the petitioner is in any
way involved in the misappropriation of ornaments pledged in
the Company and therefore, the bail application may be
favourably considered.
6. Mr. Soubhagya Ketan Nayak, learned Addl.
Government Advocate for the State being ably assisted by Mr.
Page 42 of 49
// 43 //
Tapas Kumar Praharaj, learned Standing Counsel submitted that
the statements of Ayan Saha Roy, the informant and the Area
Manager, Tapas Ranjan Pradhan indicated that after the audit
was conducted in the Company, number of illegalities committed
by the accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy in connivance with the
petitioner Nilima Lenka and others including the Branch Manager
came to fore. They have also siphoned off the money received
from the customers towards closure of their loan account. During
the course of investigation, statements have been recorded by
the Investigating Officer in order to substantiate how the plan to
commit the broad day light dacoity in the Company was chalked
out. Some other statements were also placed to highlight the
involvement of the employees of the Company in the conspiracy
to commit the crime. It is contended that without the connivance
and active participation of those employees, the dacoity in the
company would not have been possible so smoothly. It is argued
that call detail reports of the accused persons, seizure of
incriminating articles from the petitioners, seizure of gold
ornaments pledged in the company and cash from the
possession of the petitioners, identification of the recovered gold
ornaments by the gold loan account holders of the company,
huge unlawful cash transaction to the accounts of different
Page 43 of 49
// 44 //
accused persons from the account of the accused Lala Amrut
Sagar Roy, conduct of the petitioner Pitambar Sahoo in pledging
huge quantity of gold of the Company in the name of his mother
and brother in Manappuram fraudulently in connivance with
accused Lala Amrut Sagar Roy, prima facie makes out the
offences against the petitioners and at this stage, when the
investigation is still under progress and final charge sheet is yet
to be submitted and it is a dacoity of unique in nature and huge
gold ornaments and cash are yet to be recovered, at this stage
the petitioners should not be released on bail as there is
likelihood of derailing the ongoing investigation.
7. Mr. Asit Kumar Choudhury, learned counsel
appearing for the IIFL submitted that in connivance of all the
petitioners, economic fraud has been committed in the Company
and being scared of being caught during audit, dacoity was
staged very aptly and thereby innocent customers have suffered
huge loss and the Company has also suffered financial instability.
It is argued that the petitioners being hand in glove with each
other committed the crime in a pre-planned way keeping an eye
on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the society
and therefore, they should not be released on bail particularly
when there is chance of tampering with the evidence. Reliance
Page 44 of 49
// 45 //
was placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
cases of State of Gujarat -Vrs.- Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal
and others reported in (1987) 2 Supreme Court Cases
364, Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy -Vrs.- CBI reported in
(2013) 7 Supreme Court Cases 439 and Aswini Kumar
Patra -Vrs.- Republic of India reported in (2021) 84
Odisha Criminal Reports 1.
8. Economic offences are always considered as grave
offences as it involves deep rooted conspiracy and huge loss of
public fund. Such offences are committed with cool calculation
and deliberate design solely with an eye on personal profit
regardless of the consequence to the community. In such type of
offences, while granting bail, the Court has to keep in mind, inter
alia, the larger interest of public and State. The nature and
seriousness of an economic offence and its impact on the society
are always important considerations in such a case and those
aspects must squarely be dealt with by the Court while passing
an order on bail applications. (Ref: Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal
(supra), Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy (supra) and Aswini Kumar
Patra (supra)).
It is the settled law that detailed examination of
evidence and elaborate discussion on merits of the case should
Page 45 of 49
// 46 //
not be undertaken while adjudicating a bail application. The
nature of accusation, the severity of punishment in case of
conviction, the nature of supporting evidence, the criminal
antecedents of the accused, if any, reasonable apprehension of
tampering with the evidence of the witnesses, apprehension of
threat to the witnesses, reasonable possibility of securing the
presence of the accused at the time of trial and above all the
larger interests of the public and State are required to be taken
note of by the Court while granting bail.
Adverting to the contentions raised by the learned
counsel for the respective parties and analyzing the oral and
documentary evidence on record carefully, it appears that by
breaching the security guidelines of the Company, easy access
was made to the vaults frequently and gold ornaments of the
customers pledged for availing loan were siphoned off. It became
possible on account of connivance between some of the
employees of the Company and the Branch Manager in the act of
misappropriation and they were personally benefitted. The
pledged gold of the Company were re-pledged in the Company
creating new fake loan accounts and huge loan was availed in
the names of fake persons. The pledged gold of the Company
were taken out of the vaults unauthorizedly and illegally and
Page 46 of 49
// 47 //
those were pledged in Manappuram by creating fake loan
accounts and even in the names of the brother and mother of
the petitioner Pitambar Sahoo, who was the Branch Manager of
Manappuram, fake loan accounts were opened utilizing the
pledged gold of the Company and huge loan was availed. Slowly
the situation went out of control on account of continuous
illegalities committed in that process and accused Lala Amrut
Sagar Roy who seems to have master minded all the illegal
activities and paid huge amount to the accused persons to cover
up the crime, apprehended being caught during audit, for which
he in connivance with some of the co-accused persons chalked
out a plan to commit a staged dacoity in the Company to show
as if gold ornaments were taken away by the dacoits and
discussions in that respect were made in Baideswar Temple at
Choudwar. Another congregation took place at Nanda factory
premises of the petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera. The number
plates of the bikes used for commission of the crime were
tampered with in advance to evade detection. After successful
execution of crime with the assistance of some of the accused
employees of the Company, respective shares were taken by the
accused persons and lion's share was deposited with the
petitioner Ranjan Kumar Behera @ Bapi who helped accused Lala
Page 47 of 49
// 48 //
Amrut Sagar Roy very keenly in the commission of the crime.
The money transaction between the accused persons, recovery
of gold ornaments of the Company and cash from the possession
of the accused persons so also from Manappuram and seizure of
other incriminating articles during investigation, CCTV footage
showing the involvement of the some of the petitioners in the
crime prima facie established their involvement. The contentions
raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners regarding
innocence of the petitioners and non-availability of prima facie
case against them are not at all acceptable as there is no dearth
of materials in the case records collected during course of
investigation to show their involvement in the crime.
9. In view of the foregoing discussions, availability of
prima facie materials on record in the form of oral and
documentary evidence against the petitioners in support of the
accusation leveled against them as per charge sheet, the nature
and gravity of the accusation, the illegal purpose for which the
dacoity was stage managed in the IIFL, Nayasarak Branch to
cover up the misappropriation of huge pledged gold ornaments
of the customers from the vaults apprehending the same to
come to light during audit and the manner in which the plan was
chalked out to commit the crime, the way the plan was executed
Page 48 of 49
// 49 //
successfully without any hindrance in the broad day light in the
busiest area of the millennium city of Cuttack, the roles played
by the petitioners at different stages, recovery of gold ornaments
of IIFL and other incriminating articles from the possession of
the petitioners, huge financial loss suffered by the Company on
account of such crime, at this stage when many more important
areas of the case are still under investigation and many vital
links in the crime are yet to be unearthed and there is possibility
of derailing the investigation in case of grant of bail to the
petitioners, in the larger interest of public and State, I am not
inclined to release the petitioners on bail.
Accordingly, all the bail applications being devoid of
merits, stand rejected.
...............................
S.K. Sahoo, J.
Odisha High Court, Cuttack The 15th November 2021/PKSahoo Page 49 of 49