The court found that the petitioner had no direct involvement in financial misappropriation, warranting bail with conditions, considering her gender and pre-trial detention.

JUDGMENT :

G. Satapathy, J.

1. This is the bail application U/S.483 of the BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with EOW, CID CD, Bhubaneswar PS Case No.18 of 2025 corresponding to C.T. Case No.22 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under OPID Act, Cuttack, for offence punishable U/Ss. 406/420/467/468/471/120B of IPC r/w Sec. 4, 5 & 6 of PCMCS(Banning) Act 1978 & Sec. 21(1)(2)(3)/23/25 of BUDS ACT .

2. The case against the petitioner arise out of an FIR lodged by one Jayant Mishra by stating therein that one Chandra Sekhar Sahoo, Managing Director of M/s. Evoreach Ventures Pvt. Ltd. was known to him and the said company has two Directors namely petitioner-Jharana Sahoo and Kabita Rana and in the month of February, 2022, said Chandra Sekhar Sahoo convinced/allured him to invest money in the lucrative scheme launched by his company on the assurance of getting double return in 30 months with monthly return basis. Basing on such representation, the informant initially invested Rs.5.5 lakhs on 08.03.2022, Rs.4.5 lakhs on 11.03.2022 in the name of his wife Abhilasha Mishra and the informant further invested Rs.2.9 lakhs on 13.05.2022 by transferring the same to the account of the company Evoreach Ventures Pvt Ltd. and Rs.1.92 lakhs in the account of Director Kabita Rana as per request of the MD and in the process, the informant had invested a total amount of Rs.39,37,000/- and a sum of Rs.66,16,533/- from the accounts of his wife; all total Rs.1,05,53,533/- in the account of the said company Evoreach Ventures Pvt Ltd/personal account of Chandra Sekhar Sahoo, Kabita Rana and other accounts, but when the informant asked for the return of his investment, the said Chandra Sekhar Sahoo gave further impression that the said investment/returns were being reinvested in DELTAAI platform on the assurance of the same be doubled within 180 days and he also shared the user ID and Password of such platform, but the said platform stopped functioning from the month of February, 2024. The informant accordingly, approached the said Chandra Sekhar Sahoo, but in vain, but later it was found by him that the said company and its office at Bhubaneswar and Talcher were subsequently closed down and it was learnt by the informant that the said company had no authority to accept deposits from public in terms of the RBI guidelines. Finding the petitioner and the MD together with other Directors of M/s. Evoreach Ventures Pvt Ltd. to have cheated him by misappropriating his investment after creating false, fabricated and forged documents, the informant Jayant Mishra lodged the FIR paving the way for registration of EOW Bhubaneswar PS Case No. 18 of 2025 which resulted in submission of charge sheet against the petitioner and others for the offences indicated supra.

3. In the course of hearing of bail application, Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner is a Director of the company, but she is the sleeping Director and she has no role either in collecting money or depositing or misappropriating the same, rather she has been falsely framed in this case because of the alleged role of her husband and the petitioner having been detained in custody since long and charge sheet having already been submitted without any material against the petitioner, she may kindly be granted bail.

3.1. In opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner, Mr.Anil Kumar Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID submits that so far the submission with regard to the petitioner being the sleeping Director of the company is out and out false and she has d