A. Simanchala Pradhan vs State Of Odisha
2022 Latest Caselaw 7443 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                              ABLAPL No.14601 of 2022

               A. Simanchala Pradhan                 ....            Petitioner
                                          Mr. Khirod Kumar Swain, Advocate
                                        -versus-
            State of Odisha                          ....       Opposite Party
                                                     Mr. M.K. Mohanty, A.S.C.


                          CORAM:
                          JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
                                         ORDER

15.12.2022 Order No.

02. 1. Heard the learned counsels for the Petitioner and the State.

2. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks grant of bail U/s.438 Cr.P.C. in apprehension of arrest for his alleged involvement in the offence U/s. 467/468/420, I.P.C., in connection with Kavisurya Nagar P.S. Case No.503 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No.491 of 2022 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C., Kavisurya Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the allegation is to the effect that on verification of the B.Ed. Certificate submitted by the Petitioner was found to be fake, is a matter to be dealt with in the trial and no prima facie inference can be drawn as to the Certificate to have not been procured genuinely from proper custody and as such the Petitioner may be considered for pre-arrest bail.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also submitted that the F.I.R. is not sustainable in the eye of law, the same being contrary to the judgment passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.1361 of 2010.

// 2 //

5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and inter alia submitted that the subject matter of the Writ Petition referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner does not have any relevance vis-à-vis the present F.I.R., rather on the basis of the directions passed in the Writ Petition, the Petitioner could not be regularized in service and further the Certificate produced by him in respect of B.Ed. having found forged, the Petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.

6. Keeping in view the submissions of the parties and on perusal of the documents and further the Case Diary produced by the learned counsel for the State, there is material to implicate the present Petitioner in the offences alleged in as much as the B.Ed. certificate produced by the Petitioner basing upon which he remained in the employment is forged and has been obtained fraudulently.

7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner drew attention of this Court to the order passed by this Court in ABLAPL No.951 of 2020. Nothing appears from the said order nor could the Petitioner substantiate that the present Petitioner is in the same footing as that of the case referred in ABLAPL No.951 of 2020. On the contrary, the act alleged being unbecoming of a person seeking employment for being engaged in a noble profession as Teacher is not only grave but also suggests the conduct of the Petitioner, who being fully aware of the fact that the certificate has been obtained by forgery in a fraudulent manner, it is the authorities of the school and the students who had trust in him as a person of integrity and could give them a way in building their career remained at stake.

// 3 //

8. Be that as it may, having regard to submissions of the learned counsel that similarly placed persons have been allowed bail, while this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail, it is directed that the Petitioner, if so chooses, may surrender before the learned J.M.F.C., Kavisurya Nagar in the aforesaid G.R. Case during the first hour within three weeks from today and move for bail. In such event, the learned Magistrate shall consider the bail application of the Petitioner in the first hour of the day itself, strictly on the basis of the materials available on record.

9. In case of rejection of the bail application by the learned Magistrate, the Petitioner may move for bail before the higher forum in the second hour of the same day. In that event, the higher forum shall consider and dispose of the bail application of the Petitioner on the same day on its own merit, strictly on the basis of the materials available on record, without being influenced by any observation made herein by this Court or even presuming it to be a direction in affirmative.

10. Case Diary be transmitted and made available to the learned courts below, at the cost of the Petitioner, as soon as possible to facilitate disposal of the bail application of the Petitioner on the same day itself.

11. The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly.

( Chittaranjan Dash ) Judge

S.K.Parida