Orissa High Court
Vinay Kumar Santuka vs State Of Odisha on 1 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No. 1766 of 2023
Vinay Kumar Santuka .... Petitioner
Mr. D.P. Nanda, Sr. Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. P.K. Maharaj, ASC
BLAPL No. 1891 of 2023
Subhransu Sekhar Rout .... Petitioner
Mr. U.R. Jena, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. P.K. Maharaj, ASC
BLAPL No. 1727 of 2023
Umakanta Saseni .... Petitioner
Mr. S. Dwibedi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. P.K. Maharaj, ASC
BLAPL No. 4434 of 2023
Laxmidhar Lenka .... Petitioner
Mr. B.P. Das, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. P.K. Maharaj, ASC
Page 1 of 6
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER
01.05.2023
Order No.
03. 1. Since all the four BLAPLs arise out of the same P.S. Case
(Bayalish Mouza CID CB P.S. Case No.01 of 2023), they were
heard together and disposed of by this common order, on the
consent of the parties.
2. Heard Mr. D.P. Nanda, learned senior counsel, Mr. U.R.
Jena, Mr. S. Dwibedi and Mr. B.P. Das, learned counsels for the
Petitioners and Mr. P.K. Maharaj, learned Additional Standing
Counsel for the State.
3. The petitioners (Vinay Kumar Santuka & Laxmidhar
Lenka) are accused in connection with G.R. Case No.30 of 2023
pending on the file of the learned J.MF.C.(IV), Cuttack and the
petitioners (Subhransu Sekhar Rout & Umakanta Saseni) are
accused in connection with G.R. Case No.40 of 2023, pending on
the file of the learned J.MF.C.(III), Cuttack, Arising out of CID CB
P.S. Case No.01 of 2023 for alleged commission of offences under
Sections 418/420/468/467/34 of IPC.
4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for
bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge (Vig), Cuttack, by order dated 09.02.2023 & in the
aforementioned cases, the present BLAPLs have been filed.
5. It is stated by the learned senior counsel, Mr. Nanda that
the petitioner (Vinay Kumar Santuka) in BLAPL No.1766 of 2023
is the son of the proprietor of one South Point Hospital and the
allegation against him that under the Biju Swasthya Kalyan Yojana
(BSKY), the amount has been credited to the account of the hospital
without patients actually undergoing the treatment.
6. It is the submission of the learned senior counsel that the
petitioner was not named in the FIR and even if the entire allegation
is accepted at its face value, it is on record that investigation is
continuing in respect of 46 suspected beneficiaries. Hence, keeping
in view the nature of allegations and the punishment prescribed,
further continuance of the petitioners in custody from 10.01.2023 is
not warranted and in fact is punitive.
7. It is submitted by Mr. U.R. Jena, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner in BLAPL No.1891 of 2023 that the
said petitioner is a Data Entry Operator of the said hospital and it is
stated by Mr. S. Dwibedi, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner in BLAPL No.1727 of 2023 he is the House Keeping
Supervisor of the Hospital.
8. It is stated with vehemence by the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners (Subhransu Sekhar Rout & Umakanta
Saseni) in BLAPL No.1891 & 1727 of 2023 that they are innocent
and have been cited as accused only because they are working in
the Hospital.
9. So far as the petitioner (Laxmidhar Lenka) in BLAPL
No.4434 of 2023 is concerned, it is submitted by Mr. B.P. Das,
learned counsel that the said petitioner is a Ward boy.
10. It is apt to note here that in the FIR, the petitioner
(Laxmidhar Lenka) in BLAPL No.4434 of 2023 has been named as
the person who motivated the innocent villagers to part with their
BSKY card so that it can be swiped to indicate that the patient has
undergone treatment and the amount can be claimed on the said
count, though in fact such treatment was never given.
11. Learned counsel for the State on the basis of instruction
received and the recital in the Case Diary opposes the prayer for
bail.
12. The relevant extract of the said instruction is culled out
hereunder for convenience of ready reference:-
X x x x
"(iii) During verification, out of 226 without case record
claims, 45 claimants denied to have undergone any treatment at
South Point Hospital where in 46 claimants were not available for
detail verification and rest 135 claims were found genuine. Details
of claims vis-à-vis amount paid are summarized in the table below:-
CALCULATION OF FINANCIAL IMPLICATION
No. of Amount [email protected]
Net Paid
claim (INR) % (INR)
Claim with records
(125 Records) 191 9184919 918492 8266427
Claim without
record
(a) Treated 135 8087854 808785 7279069
(b) Not treated 45 2092924 154527 1390739
(c) Suspected 46 1545265 209292 1883632
Total 417 20910962 2091096 18819866
(iv) Considering the above analysis, it can be opined that
the Hospital has made 91 (b+c) claims amounting Rs.36,38,189/-
without offering any treatment and simply built up documents,
submitted the same to the SHAS, Odisha and ultimately received
payment to it's a/c- No.00470200000818 in Bank of Baroda. As
Rs.3,63,819/- has been deducted towards TDS @10, net
misappropriation amount is calculated at Rs.32,74,370/-."
x x x x
13. On a conspectus of materials on record, it comes to the
fore that the allegation against all the petitioners is that by misusing
the BSKY cards of the prospective patients, they have indulged in
defalcation.
14. It is the case of the prosecution as borne out from the
instruction extracted hereinabove " net misappropriation amount is
calculated at Rs.32,74,370/-."
15. During the course of the submission, learned senior
counsel Mr. Nanda in BLAPL No.1766 of 2023, submitted that
without prejudice to prove his bonafides, the petitioner (Vinay
Kumar Santuka) is ready to secure the amount.
16. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits
that since the investigation is at a nascent stage, releasing the
petitioners at this point would derail the ongoing investigation,
since all aspects of the modus operandi adopted by the petitioners
are yet to be unearthed. Hence, he opposes the prayer for release.
17. It is apt to note that in the case of Satender Kumar Antil
vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in 2022
(10) SCC 51, the Apex Court has specifically categorized the
economic offences under a distinct class.
18. Keeping in view the guidelines as enunciated by the Apex
Court in the said judgment relating to economic offences inter alia
under Section 420 of IPC, this Court directs the petitioners to be
released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in
seisin.
19. Additionally, it is directed that the petitioner (Vinay
Kumar Santuka) in BLAPL No.1766 of 2023 shall furnish Bank
guarantee to the tune of Rs.35,00,000/-(Rupees thirty five lakhs)
which shall be co-terminous with the currency of trial. And, this
Court is assured that the bank guarantee shall be renewed to ensure
that the same so that the same is valid till the conclusion of trial.
20. Learned Court in seisin is called upon to ensure the same.
In case of default on the said count, it will be open to the learned
Court in seisin to take steps in accordance with law to commit the
petitioner (Vinay Kumar Santuka) in BLAPL No.1766 of 2023 to
custody without any further reference to this Court.
21. It is further directed that the petitioners shall cooperate
with the ongoing investigation and shall not leave the State of
Odisha without the express permission of the learned Court in seisin
or without intimating the Investigating Officer.
22. It shall be open for the Investigating Officer to seek
variance of this order in the event the desired cooperation is not
extended by the petitioners.
23. Accordingly, the BLAPLs stand disposed of.
24. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the
rules.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Ayesha
AYESHA Digitally signed
by AYESHA ROUT
ROUT Date: 2023.05.02
19:27:33 +05'30'
