Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
G.SATAPATHY
SK. Wasiul Islam @ Rohan – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. basis for bail application and allegations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments for and against bail. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's analysis of evidence and principles. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. grant of bail and conditions. (Para 6 , 7) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Cyber Crime PS Case No.15 of 2025 corresponding to CT Case No.6 of 2025 pending in the file of learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act, Cuttack, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.318(2)/318(4)/3(5) of BNS r/w Sections 4/5/6 of Prize Chits & Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act and Section 6 of OPID Act and Section 66-D of IT Act.
3. In the course of hearing, Mr. Bishnu Prasad Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected in this case, rather the petitioner has invested and transferred money to the co-accused, but the present petitioner has never instigated or induced the complainant to invest money in online betting or received any direct investment from him and, thereby, the petitioner being innocent person and charge-sheet having already been submitted, he may kindly be granted
Bail is the rule while incarceration is the exception; absence of direct allegations against the petitioner supports bail in the context of ongoing pre-trial detention.
The court granted bail to petitioners charged with cybercrime, considering their custodial duration and lack of flight risk, as allegations were not substantiated by strong evidence warranting contin....
Statutory bail granted due to prolonged custody under section 483, balancing investigation needs and rights of the accused.
Bail is the rule, not the exception; accusations must be substantiated for pre-trial detention. Allegations based solely on documentary evidence without direct involvement in the crime warrant bail.
Pre-arrest bail may be denied where the accusations indicate serious offenses and the potential for jeopardizing the investigation.
The necessity for interrogation prevails over bail considerations in cases involving significant financial fraud.
Section 480(6) of BNSS allows bail after 60 days in custody but does not confer an absolute right, requiring judicial discretion based on trial progress and flight risk.
Bail cannot be granted when there is substantial evidence of fraud, a significant flight risk, and a history of similar offenses by the petitioner.
The court grants bail due to insufficient evidence linking the applicant to the alleged crime, emphasizing the need for fair treatment during investigation.
The court grants bail due to insufficient evidence linking the accused to the alleged crime, emphasizing the need for fair treatment in bail applications.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
