ORDER

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

3. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioners for bail in connection with S.T.F P.S. Case No.24/2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No.1729 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M, Bhubaneswar for alleged commission of offence under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(b) of IPC, read with Section 66(c), 66(d) of IT Act.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners that the Petitioners belong to a poor family and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contended that there exists no material directly implicating the present Petitioners in the alleged crime. Further, referring to the allegation made in the F.I.R., learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners submitted that although it is alleged that some mule bank accounts were opened in the name of some of the villagers, mostly tribal people, with the intention to misuse such bank accounts along with the connected mobile phone numbers, however, the prosecution has failed to come forward with a case as to whether any monetary transaction has taken place or the manner in which the same have been misused. The entire case of the prosecution is based on conjectures and surmises. As such, the bank accounts, which are opened in the name of the poor villagers and other tribal people, are being used by the scammers for extortion and commission of cyber-crimes. However, as of yet no concrete proof has been cited by the prosecution to establish the allegation that such bank accounts were in fact used in such type of offences. He further submitted that in the meantime the investigation has been concluded and the final charge sheet has been filed on 13.02.2024 against some of the accused persons including the present Petitioners for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) I.P.C read with Section 66-C/66-D of IT Act, 2000.

5. In course of his argument learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that the Petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. He further emphatically argued that no monetary transaction whatsoever has taken place in all those bank accounts which have allegedly been opened with the active participation of the present Petitioners and with an intention use them in cases of financial fraud. In such view of the matter, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners submitted that taking into consideration the period of custodial detention of the Petitioners i.e. 17.01.2024, keeping in view that the Petitioners are in custody for almost one year and the fact that in the meantime the charge-sheet has already been filed, the Petitioners be enlarged on bail on any stringent terms and conditions deemed proper by this Court.

6. Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand objected to release the Petitioners on bail on the ground that serious allegations have been made against the Petitioners in the F.I.R. He further alleged that innocent tribal people of the State of Odisha and other states have been lured to open bank accounts and such bank accounts were being sold to the gangsters for use in cases of financial fraud. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that the crime which is involved in the present case involves spans several states, therefore although the charge sheet has been filed however the investigation has been kept open. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State submitted that in the event the Petitioners are released on bail, it is likely to cause an adverse impact on the on-going investigation of the case. Accordingly, learned counsel for the State submitted that the bail application of