Orissa High Court
Tanweer Nazri vs State Of Odisha on 8 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No. 2569 of 2023
Tanweer Nazri .... Petitioner
Mr. A.P. Bose, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. A.K. Nayak, Adv. (OPID)
BLAPL No. 6124 of 2023
Abul Hasnain .... Petitioner
Mr. A.P. Bose, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. A.K. Nayak, Adv. (OPID)
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER
08.09.2023
Order No.
08. 1. Since both the BLAPLs relate to the same P.S. Case
(EOW Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.21 of 2022), on the consent of
the learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned counsel
for the OPID, they are taken up together and are disposed of by
this common order.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned
counsel for the OPID.
3. The Petitioners are accused in connection with C.T. Case
No.12 of 2022, pending on the file of the learned Presiding
Officer, Designated Court under the OPID Act, Cuttack, Odisha,
arising out of EOW Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.21 of 2022 for
alleged commission of offences under Sections 406/ 420/ 467/
468/ 471/120(B) of the IPC read with Section 6 of the OPID Act.
4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for
bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Presiding Officer, Designated
Court under the OPID Act, Cuttack, by impugned orders in the
aforementioned cases, the present BLAPLs have been filed.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner
(Tanweer Nazri) in BLAPL No.2569 of 2023 is in custody since
11.12.2022 and Petitioner (Abul Hasnain) in BLAPL No.6124 of
2023 is in custody since 13.12.2022.
6. The allegation against the Petitioner (Tanweer Nazri) in
BLAPL No.2569 of 2023 is that as a President of M/s. Vastav
India Trust, he conspired with the co-accused Abul Hasnain
(Petitioner in BLAPL No.6124 of 2023) who is the Secretary of
the said Organization and misappropriated the amounts of about
Rs.4 crores collected from the public through the district
Coordinators, Block/Panchayat Coordinators under various
schemes launched by them and deposited in the trust being
managed by the accused-Petitioners. Subsequently, none of the
beneficiaries got back their money as promised.
7. It is submitted that since charge sheet has been filed on
04.04.2023 vis-à-vis the Petitioners, further continuance of the
Petitioners in custody is not warranted.
8. Mr. A.K. Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID opposes
the prayer for bail and submits that other co-accused are at large
and hence this being an economic offence, Petitioners ought not
to be released on bail.
9. He further submits that admittedly since the Petitioners
do not normally reside within the territorial jurisdiction of the
leaned Court in seisin, it would not be possible to secure their
attendance during trial.
10. It is submitted by Mr. Bose, learned counsel for the
Petitioners basing on the recitals in the Case Diary that so far as
the complicity of the present Petitioners is concerned, it comes to
the tune of about Rs.1,26,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty
Six Lakhs) and hence, they ought not to be made liable for the
entire amount of about Rs.4 Crores, as being stated by the learned
counsel for the OPID.
11. It is stated that the Petitioners have no other criminal
antecedent save and except Lephriapada P.S. Case No.190 of
2022 which arises out of self-same transaction.
12. An affidavit has been filed at the behest of the Petitioner
(Abul Hasnain) in BLAPL No.6124 of 2023 that without
prejudice to his rights and that of the co-accused, he is willing to
deposit entire sum of about Rs.1,26,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore
Twenty Six Lakhs) alleged to have been defalcated by them.
13. Paragraph-4 of such affidavit which is germane is
extracted hereunder;
"4. That the Petitioner will pay amount of Rs.50,00,000/-
(Fifty Lakhs) within 30 days from today and after being
released on bail the petitioner will pay Rs.20,00,000/-
(Twenty Lakhs) after completion of 30 days and it is
further admitted that the petitioner will pay another cash
of Rs.20,00,000/- (Twenty Lakh) after completion of 30
days and rest amount of Rs.36,00,000/- will be paid
within the period of two months."
14. Mr. A.K. Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID submits
that this is an economic offence and as stated by the Apex Court
in the recent judgment relating to Satender Kumar Antil vrs.
Central Bureau of Investigation & another, reported in 2022
(10) SCC 51 they have to be treated on a different scale and no
leniency ought to be shown merely because the Petitioners have
volunteered to make part payment and since they have not shown
any inclination to pay the entire amount of Rs.4 crores.
15. On balancing the competing claims and being cognizant
of the fact that the trial is likely to take some time since
prosecution seeks to rely on statement of thirty witnesses, apart
from documents and keeping in view the period of custody and
that the Petitioners are the first offenders (except Lephriapada
P.S. Case No.190 of 2022 which arises of their complicity being
the President and Secretary of M/s. Vastav India Trust), as stated,
this Court is persuaded to direct the Petitioners to be released on
bail on the Petitioner (Abul Hasnain) in BLAPL No.6124 of 2023
depositing a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) as a
condition precedent on his behalf as well as on behalf of the
Petitioner (Tanweer Nazri) in BLAPL No.2569 of 2023.
16. On deposit of the same, the Petitioners shall be released
on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.
17. Additionally, it is directed that after 30 days of such
release, the Petitioner (Abul Hasnain) in BLAPL No.6124 of
2023 shall deposit a further sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Lakhs) and a further sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Lakhs) shall be deposited on or before 60th days of
release and rest amount of Rs.36,00,000/- (Thirty Six Lakhs)
shall be deposited on or before 120 days of release. Learned
Court in seisin is requested to fix the terms.
18. Keeping in view that the Petitioners do not belong to the
State of Odisha, it is directed that one of the family member of
each of the Petitioners shall execute the P.R bond in addition to
the sureties so fixed.
19. Additionally, it is also directed that the Petitioners shall
not leave the country without express permission of the learned
Court in seisin and shall appear before the I.O. once every month
on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin
till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be
submitted to the learned Court in seisin.
20. Further, it is directed that Petitioner shall co-operate with
the ongoing investigation.
21. Leave is granted to the investigating Agency to seek
variance of this order, if the Petitioners do not extend the desired
cooperation.
22. It is apt to state that on default of deposit of the amount,
as undertaken, on the dates as fixed, it shall be open to the
learned Court in seisin to commit the Petitioners to custody in
accordance with law without any further reference to this Court.
23. It is needless to state here that the direction to deposit the
amount has been passed in the facts of the present case since the
allegation relates to the defalcation of public money in tune with
the law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (Supra),
as a deterrent and it ought not to be construed in any way as
expressing any opinion regarding the complicity of the petitioners
which has to be adjudicated in an independent manner in the
impending trial.
24. Accordingly, both the BLAPLs stand disposed of.
25. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per
rules.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Santoshi
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 11-Sep-2023 20:19:12
