Orissa High Court
Raja Saha vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Parties on 8 April, 2025
Author: V. Narasingh
Bench: V. Narasingh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.12583 of 2024
Raja Saha .... Petitioner
Mr. S. Chatterjee, Sr. Advocate
Instruction by
Mr. A. Dash, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Parties
Mr. R.B. Dash, ASC
ABLAPL No.2116 of 2025
Rina Mohanty .... Petitioner
Mr. U. Sahoo, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. R.B. Dash, ASC
ABLAPL No.2132 of 2025
Joginath Pradhan .... Petitioner
Mr. U. Sahoo, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. R.B. Dash, ASC
Page 1 of 5
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER
08.04.2025
Order No.
05. 1. Since all the matters arise out of Nayagarh P.S.
No.0147 dated 06.11.2025, they are heard together and
disposed of by this common order on the consent of the
parties.
2. Heard learned senior counsel Mr. Chatterjee for
the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.12583 of 2024, learned
counsel for the Petitioners in ABLAPL No.2116 and 2132
of 2025 and learned counsel for the State.
3. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in
connection with G.R. Case No.418 of 2015 pending in the
Court of learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh, arising out of
Nayagarh P.S. No.0147 dated 06.11.2025 for
commission of offence punishable under Sections 420 of
IPC and Sections 4,5 and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money
Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.
4. The allegation against the the Petitioner in
ABLAPL No.12583 of 2024 (Raja Saha) is that he was
one of the directors of Excella Real Projects (P) Ltd.,
which was functioning in the Nayagarh District. And, he
along with other Petitioners have duped the investors to
the tune of Rs.37,00,000/-.
5. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel
referring to the earlier order of this Court that, the
Petitioner has joined the investigation and after they
joined the investigation, the charge sheet in the case at
hand was filed on 29.12.2024 and according to him
curiously enough Petitioner has been shown as
absconder.
6. It is the further submission of the learned senior
counsel for the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.12583 of 2024
that the said Petitioner (Raja Saha) had resigned since
2013 and even if the entire allegations are accepted at
the face value, since the same is based on documentary
evidence, custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is not
necessary, as admittedly, he has appeared and
cooperated with the investigation.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners
in ABLAPL No.2116 and 2132 of 2025 submit that they
were merely working as agents and since charge sheet
has already been filed they may be protected by pre-
arrest bail. He also adopts the submission of the learned
senior counsel in this regard.
8. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand
opposes such prayer and submits that so far as the
deposits are concerned, that from inception when
deposits were accepted, the company was not registered
as an NBFC and at the relevant time the Petitioner in
ABLAPL No.12583 of 2024 was admittedly one of the
Directors. Hence, it is not open for him to submit that he
has no complicity and so far as the complicity of the
Petitioners in ABLAPL No.2116 of 2025 and 2132 of 2025
are concerned it is submitted that as agents they are
equally responsible for motivating the gullible investors
to make deposits. Hence, all the Petitioners are not
entitled to the exceptional relief of anticipatory bail. More
so, since it is an economic offence and placed reliance on
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Devinder
Kumar Bansal Vrs. State of Punjab, 2025 SCC
Online SC 488.
9. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for
the State that the Petitioner in ABLAPL No.12583 of 2024
(Raja Saha) has criminal proclivity in as much as he has
been arrayed as an accused for commission of similar
type of offence.
10. Regarding the same, the learned senior counsel
submitted that by order dated 22.10.2024, passed by
the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in A.B.A No.6700
of 2024, the Petitioner-Raja Saha was granted
anticipatory bail. The said order is taken on record.
11. This Court perused the statement of the witnesses
and the charge sheet. On perusal of the charge sheet, it
is seen that while filing the same, the investigation has
not been kept open.
12. Considering the nature of allegations, the filing of
the charge sheet, investigation having not been kept
open and keeping in view the role ascribed to the
Petitioners in ABLAPL No.12583 of 2024 and 2132 of
2025 and the Petitioner in ABLAPL No. 2116 of 2025
being a lady, in the light of the order dated 21.03.2023
passed in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr., 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 452 whereby the Apex Court has clarified
that the directions in the said case dated 11.07.2022,
reported in (2020) 10 SCC 51 apply in equal measure
to cases of anticipatory bail, this Court is persuaded to
direct that on surrendering within three weeks hence and
moving for bail, the Petitioners shall be released on bail
by the learned Court in seisin on such terms as deemed
fit and proper.
13. Before releasing the learned Court shall verify as
to whether this order has been assailed before the Apex
Court and if so, the result thereof.
14. Accordingly, the ABLAPLs stand disposed of.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Soumya
Signed by: SOUMYA RANJAN SAMAL
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 10-Apr-2025 11:20:38
