ORDER

2.5.2007 — Heard Mr. S. N. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. K. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Vigilance Department.

This application has been filed by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C.

It appears from the record that two vigilance cases have been registered against the petitioner, one being for illegal sanction of loans as President of Baripada Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. and the other for giving direct appointments to certain employees in the said Bank. The said cases have been numbered as Balasore Vigilance P.S.Case No. 35 of 2005 and 36 of 2005 corre¬sponding to Vigilance Cases of even number in the Court of the learned Vigilance Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balasore. The petitioner was before this Court in BLAPL No. 7299 of 2005 in respect Vigilance P.S.Case No. 35 of 2005. This Court by an elaborate order dated 19.9.2005 discussing the materials avail¬able and other submissions made by the respective counsel for the parties, holding that the petitioner is a sitting M.L.A. and if he is arrested, his reputation in the State, particularly in his Constituency, shall be tarnished and there is also less likeli¬hood of his fleeing from justice as well as the fact that a surcharge proceeding is also pending against the petitioner, allowed the application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. directing that in case of arrest of the petitioner in the aforesaid case, he shall be released on bail of Rs. 30,000/- with two sureties solvent for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer effecting arrest on conditions that he shall make himself avail¬able to the Investigating Agency for interrogation as and when required and that he shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner. However, this Court directed that the said order shall remain in force for a period of two months from the date of the said order dated 19.9.2005.

The petitioner has stated that after passing of the above order, on 3.11.2005, the Superintendent of Police Vigilance Cell, Cuttack informed the petitioner to make himself available on 9.11.2005 at 3.00 P.M. in Vigilance Unit Office, Bhubaneswar. Accordingly, the petitioner alongwith his counsel appeared on the said date and was examined and interrogated and the Investigating Officer informed him that neither his arrest nor grant of bail was necessary. As, in the meantime, the S.P., Vigilance Cell Cuttack wrote a letter to the Bank, seeking sanction for prosecution of certain Bank officials as per Balasore Vigilance P.S.Case No. 35 of 2005, the petitioner being apprehensive that a charge sheet was contemplated to be filed not only against him, but also his seriously ailing wife and his two sons, who, accord¬ing to him, are in no way connected to the transactions of the Bank though they are the Directors of M/s. Ambika Hotel and Estates Private Ltd. which was a loanee of the Bank, has filed the present application for grant of anticipatory bail.

Mr. S. N. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the wife of the petitioner is sixty five years of age and is ailing for the last few years suffering from a brain disease, i.e. “SUBARACHNOID HAEMORRAGE” who was admitted to the Kalinga Hospital on 27.1.2007 and was removed to Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Kochi for surgery. After the above surgery being undertaken, though the wife of the peti¬tioner was discharged, but due to various complications, she is under treatment at Kalinga Hospital, Bhubaneswar.

Mr. D. K. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department, per contra, submits that the allegation in the FIR reflects a tip of the ice berg and many materials have come out during the investigation, which would, prima facie, show the guilt of the accused who is a public servant. He further submits that taking the allegations as above, on its face value, it can never be said that offence under Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of