Orissa High Court
Vikash Pareek vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 25 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.9776 of 2024
Vikash Pareek .... Petitioner
Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P. Satapathy, learned
Additional Standing Counsel
Ms. Ankita Pati, Advocate for the
informant
BLAPL No.9823 of 2024
Harshit @ Harsit Chouhan .... Petitioner
Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P. Satapathy, learned
Additional Standing Counsel
Ms. Ankita Pati, Advocate for the
informant
BLAPL No.9843 of 2024
Vijaya Rai Sharma .... Petitioner
Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P. Satapathy, learned
Additional Standing Counsel
Page 1 of 11
Ms. Ankita Pati, Advocate for the
informant
BLAPL No.9977 of 2024
Pawan Singh .... Petitioner
Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P. Satapathy, learned
Additional Standing Counsel
Ms. Ankita Pati, Advocate for the
informant
CORAM:
HON'BLE JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
ORDER
Order No. Date of hearing : 20.11.2024 / date of judgment : 25.11.2024
05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Since all these four bail applications under Section 439 of the
Cr.P.C. have arisen out of one G.R. Case No.914 of 2024 in
connection with Bolangir Cyber Crime and Economic F.I.R. No.21
dated 27.04.2024 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir,
then, all these four bail applications are taken up together
analogously for their final disposal through this common order.
3. The petitioners are in jail custody since 19.08.2024 having
been implicated under Sections 419/420/467/468/471 of the I.P.C.,
1860 read with Sections 66-C and 66-D of the Information and
Technology Act, 2000 on the allegations alleged against them on the
basis of the F.I.R. lodged by the informant that, he (informant) is
serving as a Professor at Bhima Bhoi Medical College and Hospital
at Bolangir and is residing there in Qrs. No.4R/201. On dated
02.04.2024, he (informant) received a WhatsApp message in his
mobile phone no.8439109906 about an offer for trading in bitcoin
(T)GBE Trading App provided with a web address link, to which, he
(informant) downloaded and came to know about the facility of cash
deposit option through UPI and on query of the informant, the option
provider added him(informant) in a telegram group, namely,
Helen699 and advanced the said group ahead under his guidance. So,
the informant first invested Rs.500/- in that trade and get return of
Rs.30,000/-. Thereafter, on that day, i.e., on 16.04.2024,
he(informant) invested Rs.5,000/- in GBL Site, but, as per the online
discussions between the informant and the trade controller, he
(informant) was informed not to withdraw the benefits of his
investment for seven days. So, he(informant) remained silent for
seven days since 16.04.2024, but, he(informant) was regularly
checking the sites and found Rs.5,55,065/- in his trading account,
then, as per the request of the trade controller of the telegram group,
he(informant), deposited Rs.70,00,000/-(rupees seventy lakhs) in
total in Account No.0192102100001607 having its IFSC Code
PUNB0019210 of Sujangarh Branch in the name of Shree Shyam
Enterprises in phase-wise for such trading, but, he(informant) was
unable to withdraw his principal amount using the site, for which,
he(informant) made online complain before the trade controller, but,
in reply, without any return, he(trade controller) told to the informant
to deposit more money, for which, the informant felt that, fraud is
going on. So, he(informant) reported the said matter on 26.04.2024
before I.I.C., Bolangir Cyber and Economic Crime lodging F.I.R. for
necessary legal actions against the online fraudsters.
4. Basing upon such F.I.R., a case vide Bolangir Cyber Crime
and Economic P.S. Case No.21 dated 27.04.2024 was registered and
the investigation was started.
5. During investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the
statements of the informant, witnesses, seized the detailed printouts
of HDFC Bank statements vide Account No.11071000016740,
copies of screenshots of telegram profile, chattings, connected
electronic records of the transactions, sent requisitions to the
concerned service providers to provide CDRs and SDRs of the
suspected involved mobile numbers and obtained KYC details, from
the Banks, AOF, transaction statements, linked mobile numbers
email, registered addresses along with IP addresses of all the alleged
transactions and freezed the involved accounts exercising power
under Section 102 of the Cr.P.C. and obtained the closing balance of
the involved Bank accounts and came to know that, the petitioners
and their others associates have looted away huge amount of money
from many victims including the informant fraudulently using
WhatsApp and telegram applications through virtual mobile numbers
and VPL services concealing their identities converting their INR to
USDT using various crypto trading platform and wallets and
they(petitioners and their associates) have also received money
through Hawala from different parts of India impersonating as GBE
crypto trading company and they have siphoned off the said money
to other Bank accounts across India.
6. So, the Investigating Officer arrested the petitioners on
19.08.2024 from Rajasthan and produced them before the CJM Shri
Ganganagar, Rajasthan and prayed for their transit remand and on
his prayer, the petitioners were allowed for six days transit remand
and then, on 25.08.2024, they (petitioners) were produced in the
court of learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir and were remanded to the jail
custody and accordingly, since then, they(petitioners) are in jail
custody. Accordingly, after completing investigation, the
Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet on dated
10.11.2024 against the petitioners U/S 419/420/467/468/471 of the
I.P.C., 1860 read with Sections 66-C and 66-D of the Information
Technology Act, 2000 keeping the investigation open U/S 173(8) of
the Cr.P.C., 1973 against their four co-accused persons, namely, i.e.,
Sahil Godara, Rajat Godara, Parbinder Budaniya and Hemant
Kyman Sain.
7. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the
petitioners, the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State
and the learned counsel for the informant.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted for liberal
consideration of their bail contending that, they(petitioners) are in
custody since 19.08.2024 and during the period of their staying
inside the jail, the investigation of the case has already been
completed due to submission of charge-sheet on dated 16.11.2024
against the petitioners, to which, the learned Additional Standing
Counsel for the State objected contending that, when the
investigation of the case has been kept open against the four co-
accused persons of the petitioners, those have not been arrested as
yet, then at this stage, they(petitioners) should not be allowed to go
on bail in these nature of economic offences of huge magnitude.
9. The learned counsel for the informant also vehemently
objected the bail of the petitioners contending that, when the
petitioners have committed online monetary fraud/scam of huge
magnitude, i.e., rupees seventy lakhs and when, the investigation of
the case has been kept open for collection of other computer source
documents relating to the fraudulent transactions and when the
informant has filed several affidavits stating that, he(informant) is
getting threat calls repeatedly from different unknown mobile
numbers to remain abstain from proceeding with the matter and
when he(informant) is now in serious mental trauma and distress due
to unanimous threat calls and when there is every possibility of
destruction of online electronic records by the petitioners, in case of
their release on bail, then under these situations, they(petitioners)
should not be allowed to go on bail.
10. It is forthcoming from the charge-sheet submitted by the
Investigating Officer that, the involved Bank accounts relating to the
alleged fraudulent transactions have already been freezed by the
Investigating Officer exercising his power under Section 102 of the
Cr.P.C. and the Investigating Officer has already obtained the
opening and closing balance of the said Bank accounts and
documents in respect of the transactions thereof.
11. When the petitioners are in jail custody since 19.08.2024 and
when during the staying of the petitioners inside the jail, the
investigation of the case against them (petitioners) has already been
completed due to submission of charge-sheet on dated 10.11.2024
against them U/S 419/420/467/468/471 of the I.P.C., 1860 and
Sections 66-C and 66-D of the I.T. Act, 2000 and when, the
Investigating Officer had brought the petitioners on remand as per
the order of court for their custodial interrogations and when, the
presence of the petitioners before the Investigating Officer for the
purpose of any further investigation of the case may not be required
and when the investigating agency has not come forward stating any
requirement of the petitioners for their further custodial interrogation
and when all the allegations alleged against the petitioners are based
on computer source documents, i.e., electronic records, to which,
during investigation, the same might have been accessed by the
Investigating Agency due to submission of charge-sheet and when
there is no material in the record to show that, they(petitioners) have
avoided to co-operate the investigation after their arrest and when the
main object/purpose of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused
persons during trial and when, there is no material in the record on
behalf of the prosecution to show that, the presence of the petitioners
during trial cannot be secured and when the trial of the case against
the petitioners have not been started and when there is no certainty,
when the trial of the case against the petitioners will be completed,
then at this juncture, by applying the principles of law relating to bail
enunciated in the like nature of cases by the Apex Court reported in
2011(4) Crimes-323(S.C.) : Sanjay Chandra vrs. C.B.I. and
2024(4) Crimes-41(S.C.) vrs, V. Senthil Balaji vrs. The Deputy
Director, Directorate of Enforcement, it is felt proper to allow the
petitioners to go on bail pending trial of the case against them
(petitioners) with stringent conditions looking to the interest of the
informant, witnesses and prosecution, because, the keeping up of the
investigation open by the Investigating Agency only for other co-
accused persons of the petitioners after submission of charge-sheet
on dated 10.11.2024 against them (petitioners) cannot be taken as a
ground/reason/instrument in the hands of the Investigating Agency
for the detention of the petitioners inside the jail for an indefinite
long period, when there is no possibility of completion of the trial of
the case against the petitioners within a reasonable period.
12. Therefore, all the four bail applications filed by the petitioners
are allowed.
13. They(petitioners) are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs.10,00,000/-(rupees ten lakhs) with two solvent sureties
each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in
seisin over the matter on the following conditions:-
(i) They(petitioners) shall not involve with similar
nature of offences in future.
(ii) They(petitioners) shall cooperate with the further
investigation of the case by remaining present in
the place as and when directed by the
Investigating Officer.
(iii) They(petitioners) shall not directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or promise to the
informant or to any person acquainted with the
facts or any witnesses of the case in any manner
or they(petitioners) shall not make any attempt to
influence them in any manner so as to dissuading
them from disclosing such facts before the Court
or any other authority including the Investigating
Agency.
(iv) They(petitioners) shall remain present personally
before the trial court on the dates fixed for hearing
of the case and if they wants to remain absent,
then, they shall take prior permission of the court
for the same to be represented through their
respective learned counsels.
(v) They shall surrender their passports, if any, (if not
already surrendered) before the trial court and in
case, they(petitioners) are not holders of the same,
they each shall swear affidavits separately for the
same. If they have already surrendered their
respective passports before the court in
connection with Bolangir Cyber Crime and
Economic P.S. F.I.R. No.21 of 2024, that fact
should also be supported by them(petitioners)
each through separate affidavits.
(vi) The liberty is given to the Investigating
Authorities/prosecution to make appropriate
application or applications for modification /
recalling the respective bail orders of the
petitioners, if for any reason, any of the
petitioners or all the petitioners violate any of the
above conditions imposed by this Court for their
release on bail.
14. Accordingly, these four bail applications filed by the
petitioners are disposed of finally.
15. Issue certified copy of this order to the petitioners on proper
application.
Signed by: JAGABANDHU BEHERA Judge
Court,Assistant
Cuttack
Reason: Authentication
The 25th
Location: CUTTACK 2024/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
of November,
OHC,
Date: 25-Nov-2024 17:05:12
