Orissa High Court
R. Riyas Mohammed vs State Of Odisha ….. Opposite Party on 9 June, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.12332 of 2024
R. Riyas Mohammed ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Prabhu K.N.,
Bharat Swaroop Sharma,
Ansuman Bhuyan,
Sujata Das, Kousik
Ananda Guru, A.K.
Mohanty, G. Pattnaik, R.
Moharana.
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
AGA
BLAPL No.12325 of 2024
Ramesh ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Arijeet Mishra, S.K.
Jena, S.Biswal, R.Mahato
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12389 of 2024
Asish Kishorbhai Ramani ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. S. Sudhakar Rao,
Senior Advocate
along with
M/s. Yuvraj Parekh,
T.M.Sukasiya, R.K.Jena,
Page 1 of 30.
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12409 of 2024
R. Meenachi Sundaram @ ..... Petitioner
Meenachisundaram Ramchandran
Represented By Adv.
- M/s. Sanjibani
Mishra, K.A. Guru
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12465 of 2024
Raj Sharma ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Sanjibani Mishra,
K.A. Guru
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12515 of 2024
R. Lakshmanan ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Amar Kumar
Mohanty, K.A. Guru, G.
Pattanaik, R. Moharana
Page 2 of 30.
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12517 of 2024
Kiron Jyothy PK ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Kousik Ananda
Guru, A.K. Mohanty,
R.Moharana
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12548 of 2024
Sriram Atmaram Mohite ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. S. Sudhakar Rao, Sr.
Adv.
Along with
M/s. Yuvraj Parekh,
T.M. Sukyniya, R.K.
Jena
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
Page 3 of 30.
BLAPL No.12641 of 2024
Maria Benedict ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Suryakanta Jena,
A.Goswamy, A.Singh
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12642 of 2024
Prakash ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Bijaya Kumar
Ragada, L.N. Patel,
A.Padhi, M.Sahoo,
A.Ray
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12765 of 2024
Dinesh Babu Vellaisamy @ ..... Petitioner
Dhinesh Babu SV
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Rajjet Roy, N.Hota,
S.Sourav, T.P.Tripathy
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
Page 4 of 30.
BLAPL No.12843 of 2024
Mohammed Ali Syed Ibrahim ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Pradeep Kumar
Mohanty, S.Biswal, P.K.
Samal
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12865 of 2024
Ahir Mayur Kumar ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Anand Jena,
S. Mohapatra
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.12872 of 2024
Ashish Dahyabhai Gohil ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Soumendra
Pattanaik. J.M. Rout
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
Page 5 of 30.
BLAPL No.13017 of 2024
Sachin Gautam Gupta ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Rabindra Prasad
Patnaik, B.C.Patra
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.13070 of 2024
Vikram Singh Shaktwat ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Bijaya Kumar
Ragada, L.N.Patel,
M.Sahoo, A.Ray,
A.Pattnaik, T.D.K.Dora
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.13160 of 2024
Devram ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Ramesh Agarwal,
R.Rajgahria, M.N.Das,
A.Bansal, S.Nayak,
S.Joshi
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
Page 6 of 30.
BLAPL No.209 of 2025
Akshay Kumar Singh ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Rabindra Prasad
Patnaik, B.C.Patra
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.237 of 2025
Gurujar Aryan Yogeshbhai ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Rabindra Prasad
Patnaik, B.K.Garnaik
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.1296 of 2025
Ramesh ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Bharat Bhusan
Routray
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
Page 7 of 30.
BLAPL No.1510 of 2025
Aasif Quereshi ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M/s. Arijeet Mishra,
S.K.Jena, S.Biswal,
R.Mahato, A.K.Muduli
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.2887 of 2025
Sk Jamir Uddin ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. - M/s.
Pradeep Kumar Panda,
D.K.Mohapatra, P. Nayak
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
BLAPL No.4998 of 2025
Sankar Raj P ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Ashok Kumar
Sarangi
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debasish Nayak,
A.G.A.
Page 8 of 30.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
09.06.2025
Order No.
02. 1. These matters are taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Initially the Petitioner, namely, Ramesh filed BLAPL
No.12325 of 2024 under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for his
release on regular bail. Similarly, the Petitioner namely, R. Riyas
Mohammed filed BLAPL No.12332 of 2024 for his release on
regular bail. Thereafter the connected bail applications which have
been mentioned hereinabove were filed by the respective
Petitioners for their release on bail.
3. On perusal of the order sheet, it appears that the matters
were listed before different Benches of this Court. Since the bail
application filed by the Petitioner, namely, Ramesh (BLAPL
No.12325 of 2024) was the earliest one in the series, the same was
listed as the lead matter along with all connected bail applications.
Vide order dated 28.03.2025 although the learned coordinate
Bench directed the matter to be listed on 9th April, 2025, however
the same could not be taken up on the date fixed.
4. While the above was the position, the learned coordinate
Bench vide its order dated 17.04.2025 found that some other
applications does not belong to the roster of that Bench.
Accordingly, on the very same day, an order was passed directing
the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court to do the needful for
Page 9 of 30.
listing of the matters before the appropriate Bench with kind
approval of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.
5. Being aggrieved by the order dated 17.04.2025, the
Petitioner, namely, R. Riyas Mohammed (BLAPL No.12332 of
2024) approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Special
Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).8231/2025. The Hon’ble Supreme
Court vide order dated 30.05.2025 disposed of the aforesaid
appeal with the following observations:-
“Having regard to the nature of relief claimed, we
dispose of the Special Leave Petition with a
request to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the
Orissa High Court to list all these bail applications,
including that of the petitioner, on 09.06.2025.
We also request the learned Judge before whom
these applications will be listed to decide the same
expeditiously. It is, however, clarified that we
have not expressed any opinion on the merits of
the case.”
6. After disposal of the appeal preferred by the Petitioner-R.
Riyas Mohammed (BLAPL No.12332 of 2024), the case records
were placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Orissa High
Court. The note sheet and order dated 23.04.2025 which have
been attached to the case record reveal that the learned D.R.
(Judicial) placed the record before the Hon’ble Chief Justice.
Along with the note, a copy of the order passed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in W.P.(Crl.) No.55/2025 (Shekhar Prasad Mahto
@ Shekhar Kushwaha Vs. The Registrar General, Jharkhand High
Court & Anr.) was also brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Chief
Justice. The order passed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice on
23.04.2025 reveals that all bail applications have been assigned to
Page 10 of 30.
this Bench. Learned Deputy Registrar (Judicial) sought for
instruction from this Bench by drawing attention of this Court to
the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave
to Appeal (Crl.) No.8231/2025 on 30.05.2025. In obedience to the
request made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated
30.05.2025, the above noted batch of bail applications have been
specially listed before this Bench with the kind approval of the
Hon’ble Chief Justice.
7. Heard the learned counsels appearing for different
Petitioners in the above noted batch of bail applications and Mr.
Debasish Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate
representing the State-Opposite Party. Perused the case diary as
well as the materials on record.
8. The case of the prosecution as has been narrated in the
F.I.R., in a nutshell, is that on 24.08.2024, an F.I.R. was lodged by
the Complainant, namely, one Kuntal Majumdar making
allegation for commission of offences punishable under Sections
318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) & 3(5) of the
B.N.S., 2023 read with Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the
Information Technology Act, 2000. Accordingly, the Cyber
Crime Police Station of C.I.D., Odisha registered F.I.R. No.48
dated 24.08.2024. The Informant, namely, one Kuntal Majumdar
has alleged in the written F.I.R. that on 1st week of July, 2024 he
was automatically added in a Whatsapp Group, namely, KOTAK
Investment Club by the admin having Mobile No+1(617)2594164.
The Informant, taking into consideration the name of the
Company, i.e. KOTAK Investment Club, continued in the
Page 11 of 30.
Whatsapp Group and took interest in the activities of the group.
Thereafter, he contacted the Assistant/Admin, namely, Evelyn
Smith with a request to allow him for trading. The above named
Evelyn Smith asked for Aadhar Card, Bank Account Number and
consequently enrolled the Informant for trading. The Informant
has further alleged that the group was having regularly discussions
every day at 9 A.M., 2 P.M. and 8 P.M. During the course of such
discussion in the group, a recommendation was given to buy a
particular stock at 50% discount. He has also alleged when his
level of confident increased, he started trading and invested in an
I.P.O. of a company, namely, V.L. Infraprojects Limited and,
accordingly, he was allotted 2540000 shares at a discounted price
of Rs.19.00 as against the base value of Rs.48.00.
9. The F.I.R. further reveals that since the allotted numbers of
shares were huge, the Informant expressed his inability to
purchase such huge quantity of shares to the admin. The admin,
on the other hand, informed the Informant that since it is a system
generated allocation of shares, they have no control over it. The
Informant was further informed that in the event he refuses to buy
the allotted shares, his total available fund will be freezed.
Accordingly, the Informant with his entire retirement corpus
purchased the total allotted share to the tune of Rs.4.82 Crores.
The shares so purchased finally opened at Rs.110.00 and the fund
of the Informant immediately jumped above Rs.25 crores
immediately. When the Informant wanted to withdraw the funds
he was informed that before withdrawal the Informant is required
to deposit 75% of service fee @ 20% of profit and the total of such
Page 12 of 30.
amount is Rs.3.5 Crores. The Informant arranged some money
and requested the admin to allow him to withdraw. He was again
informed that he can withdraw upto Rs.23 Crores because of some
congestion and for that he has to deposit an amount equal to 1% of
the withdrawal amount i.e. Rs.23 lakhs. Such amount was
immediately deposited by the Informant with a request to permit
withdrawal. Thereafter, when the Informant attempted to
withdraw the amount, he could not succeed is his attempt and
eventually he was removed from the group by the admin and the
app that was used by the Informant was deactivated. Finally, the
Informant realized that he has been cheated to the tune of Rs.6.28
Crores.
10. On the basis of the aforesaid compliant, the C.I.D., C.B.,
Cyber Crime Police Station registered P.S. Case No.48 of 2024.
Accordingly, the investigation was started and in course of such
investigation, several persons including the Petitioners in batch of
bail applications have been arrested in connection with the present
crime.
11. Learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners in the
respective bail applications, at the outset, contended that the
Petitioners are poor and innocent persons who have been falsely
implicated in the present case. It was also argued that the real
culprit has misused the bank account of the present Petitioners.
Learned counsels further argued that the Petitioners who are poor
and helpless persons mostly workers, labourers, drivers and
students have been used in the present crime without such
Petitioners having any knowledge and information with regard to
Page 13 of 30.
the crime that has been committed by using them. It was also
argued by the learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners that
the defrauded amount was initially transferred to the accounts of
the Petitioners on the request of their friends and persons known to
them on the plea of some urgency. They further submitted that the
money which was initially transferred to the bank account of the
Petitioners were subsequently retransferred to other accounts on
the request of the known persons or friends with whom they had
shared their bank details only with the intention to help them out
in an emergency situation. In such view of the matter, learned
counsel for the Petitioners contended that the Petitioner, who are
mostly innocent persons, have been used in the present crime
without the Petitioners having any knowledge at all with regard to
the crime that has been committed in the present case.
12. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the Petitioners
further emphatically argued that most of the Petitioners are poor
and uneducated persons. Most of them are working as helpers,
labourers, drivers, salesmen etc. and that they have acted in good
faith on the request of some persons, who are either known or
close to them. It was further contended on behalf of the
Petitioners that the Petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate
with the investigation and to appear before the court on each and
every date fixed in the event they are released on bail by this
Court. Learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners further
contended that almost all the Petitioners in the connected batch of
bail applications were arrested during October and November,
2024 and, as such, they are languishing in jail custody for a period
Page 14 of 30.
exceeding six months. It was also submitted that in the meantime
the investigation has progressed substantially and a preliminary
charge sheet has already been filed. As such, the custodial
interrogation of the Petitioners is not required. They further
contended that taking into consideration the poor financial
condition of most of the Petitioners, there exists no flight risk. On
such ground, learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners urged
that the Petitioners be released on bail on any stringent terms and
conditions as it would be deemed just and proper by this Court.
13. Mr. Debasish Nayak, learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other
hand, contended that the gravity and magnitude of the crime that
has been alleged in the F.I.R. does not permit the Petitioners to be
released on regular bail. Referring to the F.I.R. as well as the
documents available in the case diary, learned Additional
Government Advocate contended that the alleged fraud is to the
tune of Rs.6.28 Crores and a retired employee has been cheated
and looted by the accused persons. It was also contended that the
nature of crime that has been alleged in the F.I.R. is no less than a
cyber-scam and the same is spread over the entire country.
Considering the magnitude, the seriousness and the extent of the
fraud committed, a Special Task Force has been constituted to
investigate the matter. Accordingly, different teams have been
sent to different parts of the country to carry on investigation and
to arrest the accused persons, who are involved in the present
crime. He further strenuously argued that the preliminary
investigation prima facie reveals that the root of the present crime
Page 15 of 30.
is connected to a bank account in Vietnam. Therefore, the alleged
involvement of overseas scamsters in the present cyber fraud
cannot be ruled out at this stage. He further submitted that the
preliminary investigation further reveals that the amount which
has been defrauded has been transferred to different mule account
involving the present Petitioners and subsequently the money
either has been retransferred or withdrawn from the bank account
of the present Petitioners. He further expressed that a part of the
defrauded amount has already been sent overseas by using the
hawala route. Referring to the seriousness and magnitude of the
crime, further indicating that the matter is still under investigation
and finally charge sheet has not been filed, learned Additional
Government Advocate vehemently objected to the release of the
Petitioners on bail.
14. On a careful analysis of the factual background of the
present case, further on a close scrutiny of the materials collected
in course of the investigations which are part of the case diary and
upon a careful examination of the preliminary charge sheet placed
on record, this Court observes that the offences alleged is a
financial scam involving a huge sum of money. However, it prima
facie appears that the present Petitioners were used to loot the
defrauded amount by alluring them a small portion of the money
transferred to their amount as commission. Thus, it appears that
the banks account belonging to the Petitioners have been used as
mule accounts to syphon of the money belonging to the Informant.
It was also observed that in the case of all Petitioners, the money
which was initially transferred to their accounts have been
Page 16 of 30.
subsequently retransferred to the accounts of other persons. The
bank statement of the accounts belonging to the Petitioners reveals
that except the present transaction there are no other high value
transactions. Although some of the Petitioners are involved in
several cases of similar nature, however, the statement of the bank
account which has been filed before this Court does not give a
clear picture. In any case, it would be pre-mature to come to a
definite conclusion that the bank accounts of the Petitioners were
used as a mule accounts by the perpetrators of the crime and the
specific involvement of each of the Petitioners is yet to be
ascertained as no final charge sheet has been filed indicating
closure of the investigation.
15. Taking into consideration the surrounding facts and
circumstances, the materials available on record, further keeping
in view the nature of the allegation made against the present
Petitioners and further taking note of their incarceration in judicial
custody and the fact that the preliminary charge sheet has already
been filed in the meantime, this Court is of the considered view
that the custodial interrogation of the Petitioners may not be
necessary. However, their presence may be required in course of
further investigation as well as during the trial.
16. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, this Court is inclined to
release the Petitioners on regular bail subject to stringent terms
and conditions. Since all the bail applications arise out of a single
F.I.R. and the nature of the allegations are almost identical against
each of the Petitioners, all the above noted bail applications are
being allowed in terms of the present order. However, the
Page 17 of 30.
conditions shall vary according to their criminal antecedent and
the amount of money involved in each of the cases. As such, the
conditions subject to which the Petitioners shall be released are
ordered separately in the following paragraphs :-
I. So far as BLAPL No.12332 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-R. Riyas Mohammed shall
be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin
over the matter;
II. So far as BLAPL No.12325 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Ramesh shall be released
on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing
a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand)
with two local solvent sureties each for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over
the matter; and he shall also furnish cash security of
Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) before the Court in
seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any
Nationalized bank in interest bearing account
initially for a period of one year which will be
renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial
and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of
the trial of the case;
III. So far as BLAPL No.12389 of 2024 is
Page 18 of 30.
concerned, the Petitioner-Asish Kishorbhai Ramani
shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of
2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent
sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction
of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall
also furnish cash security of Rs.99,000/- (Rupees
nine thousand) before the Court in seisin over the
matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized bank
in interest bearing account initially for a period of
one year which will be renewable from time to time
till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by
the final outcome of the trial of the case;
IV. So far as BLAPL No.12409 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner- R. Meenachi Sundaram @
Meenachisundaram Ramchandran shall be released
on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing
a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand)
with two local solvent sureties each for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over
the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee
to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) in
favour of the court in seisin over the matter before
the court below and such bank guarantee shall be
subject to further orders to be passed by the trial
court of the case.
Page 19 of 30.
V. So far as BLAPL No.12465 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Raj Sharma shall be
released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish
bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees
five lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the
matter before the court below and such bank
guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be
passed by the trial court of the case;
VI. So far as BLAPL No.12515 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-R. Lakshmanan shall be
released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank
guarantee to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand) in favour of the court in seisin over the
matter before the court below and such bank
guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be
passed by the trial court of the case;
VII. So far as BLAPL No.12517 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Kiron Jyothy PK shall be
Page 20 of 30.
released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank
guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one
lakh) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter
before the court below and such bank guarantee
shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the
trial court of the case.
VIII. So far as BLAPL No.12548 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Sriram Atmaram Mohite
shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of
2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent
sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction
of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall
also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in favour of the
court in seisin over the matter before the court below
and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further
orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.
IX. So far as BLAPL No.12641 of 2024 is
concerned, The Petitioner-Maria Benedict shall be
released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
Page 21 of 30.
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank
guarantee to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five
lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter
before the court below and such bank guarantee
shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the
trial court of the case.
X. So far as BLAPL No.12642 of 2024 is
concerned, The Petitioner-Prakash shall be released
on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing
a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand)
with two local solvent sureties each for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over
the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee
to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) in
favour of the court in seisin over the matter before
the court below and such bank guarantee shall be
subject to further orders to be passed by the trial
court of the case.
XI. So far as BLAPL No.12765 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Dinesh Babu Vellaisamy@
Dhinesh Babu SV shall be released on bail in G.R.
Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of
Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with two local
solvent sureties each for the like amount to the
Page 22 of 30.
satisfaction of the court in seisin over the matter; and
he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in favour of the
court in seisin over the matter before the court below
and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further
orders to be passed by the trial court of the case.
XII. So far as BLAPL No.12843 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Mohammed Ali Syed
Ibrahim shall be released on bail in G.R. Case
No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail bond of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two local
solvent sureties each for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter;
and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune
of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) in favour of the
court in seisin over the matter before the court below
and such bank guarantee shall be subject to further
orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;
XIII. So far as BLAPL No.12865 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Ahir Mayur Kumar shall be
released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank
guarantee to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten
Page 23 of 30.
lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter
before the court below and such bank guarantee
shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the
trial court of the case;
XIV. So far as BLAPL No.12872 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Ashish Dahyabhai Gohil
shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of
2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent
sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction
of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall
also furnish cash security of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
fifty thousand) before the Court in seisin over the
matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized bank
in interest bearing account initially for a period of
one year which will be renewable from time to time
till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by
the final outcome of the trial of the case;
XV. So far as BLAPL No.13017 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Sachin Gautam Gupta shall
be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank
guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,70,000/- (Rupees one
Page 24 of 30.
lakh seventy thousand) in favour of the court in
seisin over the matter before the court below and
such bank guarantee shall be subject to further
orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;
XVI. So far as BLAPL No.13070 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Vikram Singh Shaktwat
shall be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of
2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent
sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction
of the Court in seisin over the matter; and he shall
also furnish bank guarantee to the tune of
Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand) in
favour of the court in seisin over the matter before
the court below and such bank guarantee shall be
subject to further orders to be passed by the trial
court of the case;
XVII. So far as BLAPL No.13160 of 2024 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Devram shall be released
on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing
a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand)
with two local solvent sureties each for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over
the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee
to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) in
favour of the court in seisin over the matter before
Page 25 of 30.
the court below and such bank guarantee shall be
subject to further orders to be passed by the trial
court of the case;
XVIII. So far as BLAPL No.209 of 2025 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Akshay Kumar Singh shall
be released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish
bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees
one lakh fifty thousand) in favour of the court in
seisin over the matter before the court below and
such bank guarantee shall be subject to further
orders to be passed by the trial court of the case;
XIX. So far as BLAPL No.237 of 2025 is concerned,
the Petitioner-Gurujar Aryan Yogeshbhai shall be
released on bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish cash
security of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) before
the Court in seisin over the matter, which shall be
kept in any Nationalized bank in interest bearing
account initially for a period of one year which will
Page 26 of 30.
be renewable from time to time till conclusion of
trial and the same shall be abide by the final
outcome of the trial of the case;
XX. So far as BLAPL No.1296 of 2025 is concerned,
the Petitioner-Ramesh shall be released on bail in
G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a bail
bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) with two
local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter;
and he shall also furnish bank guarantee to the tune
of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs) in favour of
the court in seisin over the matter before the court
below and such bank guarantee shall be subject to
further orders to be passed by the trial court of the
case;
XXI. So far as BLAPL No.1510 of 2025 is concerned,
The Petitioner-Aasif Quereshi shall be released on
bail in G.R. Case No.1143 of 2024 on furnishing a
bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand)
with two local solvent sureties each for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over
the matter; and he shall also furnish bank guarantee
to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) in
favour of the court in seisin over the matter before
the court below and such bank guarantee shall be
subject to further orders to be passed by the trial
Page 27 of 30.
court of the case;
XXII. So far as BLAPL No.2887 of 2025 is
concerned, the Petitioner-SK. Jamir Uddin shall be
released on bail in C.T.(S) Case No.361 of 2025 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish
bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees
two lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the
matter before the court below and such bank
guarantee shall be subject to further orders to be
passed by the trial court of the case;
XXIII. So far as BLAPL No.4998 of 2025 is
concerned, the Petitioner-Sankar Raj P shall be
released on bail in C.T.(S) Case No.361 of 2025 on
furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty
thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in
seisin over the matter; and he shall also furnish bank
guarantee to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two
lakhs) in favour of the court in seisin over the matter
before the court below and such bank guarantee
shall be subject to further orders to be passed by the
trial court of the case;
17. Furthermore, release of all the above Petitioners in
Page 28 of 30.
the above batch of bail applications shall also be subject to
the following common conditions:-
I. While on bail, they shall not indulge in similar
criminal activities;
II. They shall cooperate with the investigation and
shall appear before the I.O. as and when their presence
is required on an notice being given by the I.O.
indicating the specific date and time of the appearance
of the Petitioners;
III. They shall file an affidavit indicating their local
addresses, mobile phone numbers, Aadhaar details and
any other contact details;
IV. They shall keep the I.O. informed about their
whereabouts and any change in their addresses and
mobile numbers at regular intervals of fifteen days
from the date of their release from judicial custody;
V. They shall appear before the trial court on each
and every date fixed unless such appearance is
dispensed with by the trial court in accordance with
law; andVI. They shall not leave the country till conclusion
of the trial and if they have any travel documents like
Passport etc., same shall be surrendered before the
trial court at the time of their release on bail and in the
event they do not have any travel document, then anPage 29 of 30.
affidavit to the aforesaid extent be filed before the trial
court.
18. In the event of violation of any of the conditions
indicated hereinabove, the trial court is authorized to cancel
the bail application of the Petitioners in accordance with law
and may proceed to arrest the Petitioners by issuing an arrest
warrant.
19. The BLAPLs are accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Vacation Judge
Debasis
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: DEBASIS AECH
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT
Date: 10-Jun-2025 14:59:19
Page 30 of 30.