The court emphasized the dishonest intention of the petitioners in inducing investors to part with their money and the large scale public interest involved in economic offences.

JUDGMENT :

B.N. Mahapatra, J. - The present petition has been filed u/s 439, Cr. P.C. in connection with G.R. Case No. 4730 of 2012, now pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar, arising out of E.O.W. Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No. 12 of 2012 with prayer to release the petitioners on bail on any terms and conditions. Petitioners in the present case are three in number. They are Dr. Tirupati Panigrahi, Chairman, Hi-Tech Medical College and Hospital, Bhubaneswar and Managing Director, Hi-Tech Estates and Promoters Private Limited, (2) Sri Tirupati Choudhury, Director of Hi-Tech Estates and Promoters Private Limited, Bhubaneswar, and (3) Sri Madhusudan Panigrahi, Director, Hi-Tech Estates and Promoters Private Limited, Bhubaneswar.

2. The petitioners are alleged to have committed offence punishable under Sections 120-B/420/406/411/469/471/34, IPC.

3. Prosecution case in a nutshell is that the informant-Hemanta Kumar Behera, who is residing in Bhubaneswar for last 10 years, in the year 2002 came to know from an advertisement floated in the newspaper and also after going through the leaflets and brochure of Rajdhani Systems and Estates Private Limited that near Bhubaneswar, the Company has started plotted scheme and offered 1200 square feet of land for an amount of Rs. 42,000/-. Being swayed away by the advertisement the informant went to the office of the Company at Saheed Nagar, met the Managing Director and other Directors and enquired about Bhagya Nagar House Site Project and he booked two plots on 09.07.2002 by paying down payment of Rs. 20,000/- and membership fees of Rs. 500/-; in total he gave Rs. 20,500/-. On payment of Rs. 20,500/- the informant entered into an agreement with the Company and thereafter he has deposited Rs. 83,500/- as agreed between them. Petitioners are the Managing Director and Directors of the said Company. Despite paying the entire amount he was not handed over any plot as promised by them. Feeling that he has been cheated by the petitioners by giving false assurances and taking money from him and other persons including his son in-law and investing the said money in other businesses, the informant lodged FIR before the Superintendent of Police, EOW, Bhubaneswar, C.I.D., CB, Odisha, Bhubaneswar on 29.12.2012. Basing on the F.I.R., the Superintendent, EOW, Bhubaneswar registered EOW Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No. 12/2012 and directed Sri Saroj Kumar Rath, OPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, EOW, CID, CB, Bhubaneswar to take up investigation of the case.

4. Petition filed before the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar u/s 437, Cr. P.C. for grant of bail was rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate. Being aggrieved, petitioners filed petition before the Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar for grant of bail u/s 439, Cr. P.C. The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar rejected the petition on 15.01.2013 in B.A. No. 16/22 of 2013.

5. Mr. J. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that prosecution case is false and concocted one. Petitioners are Managing Director and Directors of the Company, named and styled as Rajdhani Systems and Estates Private Limited. The Company has purchased land measuring Ac. 98.24 decimals in and around Bhubaneswar for the purpose of this project. Out of said land Ac. 18.0 decimals of land have already been registered in favour of 451 persons and since the Company has faced difficulties with regard to the Consolidation Operation and for making the land free hold, the Company in the year 2010, gave a notice to different applicants including the present informant clearly mentioning therein that the Company faced income tax search in the year 2005. During search, all the relevant original documents have been seized by the Income Tax Department. Bhagyanagar Project comprises of Chakka land. The chaka land can not be sold out by fragmenting into sizeable sub-plots except after conversion of the same by the competent authority. After completion of the Scheme the Company would ha