Gagan Bihari Mishra vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party
2025 Latest Caselaw 653 Ori

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 653 Ori
Judgement Date : 15 May, 2025

Orissa High Court

Gagan Bihari Mishra vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party on 15 May, 2025

Author: G. Satapathy

Bench: G. Satapathy

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                   BLAPL No.1216 of 2023

   (In the matter of application U/S.439 of the Code of
   Criminal Procedure).

 Gagan Bihari Mishra                 ...           Petitioner
                          -versus-
 State of Odisha                     ...     Opposite Party

 For Petitioner          :     Mr. Y. Das, Sr. Advocate
                               along with Mr. A. Bhuyan,
                               Advocate

 For Opposite Party      :     Mr. J.P. Patra, Advocate
                               (OPID)

       CORAM:
                   JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

  F DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:15.05.2025(ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.

1. This is a bail application U/S.439 of CrPC by

the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with EOW PS

Case No.3 of 2018 corresponding to CT Case No.5 of

2018 pending in the file of learned Presiding Officer,

Designated Court under OPID Act, Cuttack, for

commission of offences punishable U/Ss.420/ 467/ 468/

471/ 406/ 120-B of IPC r/w Section 6 of OPID Act, on the

allegation of cheating by forging documents and entering

into conspiracy with co-accused persons.

2. Heard, Mr. Yasobant Das, learned Senior

Counsel, who is being assisted by Mr. Ansuman Bhuyan,

learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.P. Patra,

learned counsel for the OPID in the present matter and

perused the record.

2.1. In objecting the bail application of the

petitioner, Mr. Patra has specifically submitted that no

doubt the son of the petitioner, who is the builder has

already been granted bail by an order of the Apex Court,

but the role played by the present petitioner is in fact

contributed to the detriment to the cause of the innocent

purchasers of flats because a sum of Rs.2 Crores 92

Lakhs has been transferred from the account of the son

of the present petitioner to the personal account of the

present petitioner and they have also taken a loan of Rs.8

Crores from the DHFL, which is yet to be returned/repaid

and not a single flat has been handed over to any

prospective buyers.

3. After having considered the rival

submissions upon perusal of record, there appears some

allegation against the petitioner, but the principal accused

Mr. Durga Prasanna Mishra has been granted bail by an

order passed by the Apex Court in SLP(Crl.) No.10184 of

2022. It is also not in dispute that the present petitioner

is aged about 75 years and he was in custody for around

three years. The petitioner was admittedly on interim

bail, but when this Court asked him to surrender to

custody, he challenged it before the Apex Court in

SLP(Crl.) No.10184 of 2022, in which the petitioner was

protected by way of extension of the interim bail, but

subsequently the Apex Court while disposing of the SLP

has directed this Court to fix up a date for hearing and

dispose of the regular bail application on merit, while

setting aside the impugned order partly directing the

petitioner to surrender to custody. Further, the trial is yet

to be concluded and 6 out of 85 witnesses have been

examined till today as per the admitted submission of the

parties. In the circumstance, as to when the trial would

be concluded is still a guess, but it would definitely take

considerable time.

4. In view of the above facts and circumstance

and after having considered the rival submissions and

taking into account the age and the custody of the

petitioner and his right to speedy trial as guaranteed

under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and keeping

in view the grant of bail to principal accused Mr. Durga

Prasanna Mishra, this Court without expressing any view

on merits admits the petitioner to bail.

5. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner

stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail

on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five

Lakhs) only with two solvent sureties each for the like

amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin

of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and

proper by it with following conditions:-

(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

(ii) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.269 of BNS, 2023 in accordance with law,

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by intimating his present address of stay to the concerned Court.

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the

case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner

without further reference to this Court, if any of the

above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of

bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the

subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for

similar/grave offences on prima facie accusations may be

treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

6. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

7. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as

per Rules.

(G. Satapathy) Judge