The attachment of properties under the OPID Act, validated by proper procedural compliance, emphasizes the necessity of safeguarding depositor interests despite ex parte proceedings not infringing upon fair hearing principles.

JUDGMENT :

Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. The Appellant, in the present appeal, challenges the order dated 04.02.2022 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court, Cuttack, in I.A. No.03 of 2019, on the grounds that the impugned order suffers from gross procedural irregularities and was rendered in violation of settled principles of natural justice.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(i) The Appellant companies, M/s Odisha Homes Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Trisat Estates & Construction Pvt. Ltd., are engaged in the real estate business, including providing plots and flats to customers. Both companies are represented by their respective Managing Directors and operate within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.

(ii) On 30.01.2018, one Shri Ashish Pattanaik lodged a written report before the Superintendent of Police, EOW, Bhubaneswar Police Station. It was alleged that M/s Odisha Homes Pvt. Ltd. was offering flats under a housing project titled “Anand Homes” at Mouza Kuha, Jatni Tahasil, District Khordha. The informant, attracted to the project, expressed his intention to purchase a 2BHK flat. On 27.04.2011, he deposited a booking amount of Rs. 20,000/-, and an agreement was executed between him and one of the company’s Directors. Subsequent payments of Rs. 5,30,000/- were made on various dates.

(iii) According to the informant, under the agreement, the flat was to be handed over within two years. However, the construction was not completed within the stipulated time, and by 2014, the company’s office at Nayapalli was closed. Based on this report, EOW Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No. 02 of 2018 was registered on 30.01.2018 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B IPC, along with Section 6 of the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2011 (OPID Act), and investigation commenced.

(iv) The Managing Director of M/s Odisha Homes Pvt. Ltd., Appellant No. 3, was arrested on 31.01.2018 and remanded to custody. A bail application was filed before the Designated Court under the OPID Act, Cuttack, which was rejected. Subsequently, in BLAPL No. 2666 of 2018, this Court granted interim bail to Appellant No. 3 for 126 days. The Appellants surrendered before the Designated Court within the stipulated period.

(v) During the investigation, statements of witnesses and several investors were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Upon completion of the investigation, charge-sheet No. 63, dated 31.12.2018, was submitted against the Appellants and others for the alleged offences.

(vi) During the proceedings, certain properties of the companies were seized. The State of Odisha, represented through the Additional District Magistrate-cum-Competent Authority, Cuttack, filed I.A. No. 03 of 2019 under Section 4(3) of the OPID Act, seeking an ad interim order of attachment. By order dated 04.02.2022, the learned Designated Court, Cuttack, directed the sale of immovable properties listed in Schedule-A through public auction, the realization of amounts from frozen accounts, and the distribution of proceeds among depositors/investors.

(vii) Some of the Directors of the Appellant companies filed CRLA No. 171 of 2022 before this Court, which was disposed of by order dated 28.03.2022. Thereafter, SLP (Crl.) No. 4427 of 2022 was filed before the Supreme Court and dismissed by order dated 13.05.2022.

(viii) The present appeal has been filed by the Appellants, aggrieved by the order dated 04.