Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
G.SATAPATHY
Subharun Das – Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of online investment fraud. (Para 1) |
| 2. conditions for bail under section 480(6) of bnss. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. balance of personal liberty and justice. (Para 6) |
| 4. insufficient grounds for bail due to mother's illness. (Para 7) |
| 5. bail application rejected; trial urgency. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT :
G. Satapathy, J.
1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with CID CB Cyber PS Case No.21 of 2024 corresponding to GR Case No.395 of 2024 pending in the file of learned JMFC (UTP), Cuttack, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.419/420/465/467/468/471/120-B/34 of IPC r/w Sections 66 (C)/66(D) of IT Act, on the main allegation of cheating the gullible investors by alluring them to invest online in the fictitious company like TECHSTARS PRO with the advice of a WhatsApp group created by him & others in the name of “Ram Investment Academy” and in the process, cheating the informant for a sum of Rs.2,58,60,000/-.
2. Heard, Mr. Soura Chandra Mohapatra, learned Senior Counsel, who is being assisted by Mr. S. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the
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.
Mandatory bail is required after sixty days of custody if the trial is not concluded, as per Section 480(6), promoting adherence to the right against indefinite detention under Article 21.
The court granted bail, emphasizing the lack of substantial evidence against the applicant and the need for fair treatment in pre-trial phase.
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....
Pre-arrest bail may be denied where the accusations indicate serious offenses and the potential for jeopardizing the investigation.
A defendant can be granted bail if the prosecution fails to prove the necessity of continued detention, considering lack of prior criminal records and nearing completion of investigation.
Insufficient evidence to deny bail in the absence of criminal antecedents.
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 grants bail based on no significant evidence linking the accused to the alleged crimes and prior bail granted to the prime accused.
The court granted bail considering the nature of charges, lengthy detention, and the status of co-accused already released on bail.
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
