IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

BLAPL No.7774 of 2021

Mir Jamiruddin

&.

Petitioner

Mr. U.C. Mishra, Advocate

-Versus-

Republic of India (CBI)

&.

Opp. Party

Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Standing Counsel (CBI)

CORAM:

JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

DATE OF HEARING : 28.10.2021 DATE OF ORDER : 01.11.2021

1.

An application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of

bail vis-à-vis petitioner is moved on the grounds inter alia that issuance

of warrant in connection with SPE No.14 of 2014 corresponding to

R.C. No.19(S) of 2014 pending in the court of learned Special CJM

(CBI), Bhubaneswar registered under Section(s) 420/409/120-B IPC

read with Section(s) 4, 5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation

Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and his remand is wholly unjustified.

2.

As is revealed, the informant, namely, Superintendent of

Police, CBI, SPE, SCB/SIT, Kolkata lodged an F.I.R. on 5.6.2014 stating

that as per the direction of the Hon9ble Supreme Court in W.P.(C)

Nos.401 and 413 of 2013 by order dated 9^th May, 2014, investigation

of cases relating to money scam registered in different jurisdictions in

the State of West Bengal and Odisha was transferred to CBI and

accordingly, three F.I.Rs. originally lodged against M/s Green Ray

Group of companies corresponding to EOW, Bhubaneswar Case No.14

dated 28^th May, 2013 under Section(s) 420/120-B/34 IPC; EOW

Bhubaneswar Case No.17 dated 3^rd June, 2013 under Section(s)

420/120-B IPC read with Section(s) 4, 5 & 6 of the PCMCS (Banning)

Act, 1978; and Baliapal P.S. Case No.89 dated 18.5.2013 under

Section(s) 420/120-B IPC read with Section(s) 4, 5 & 6 of the PCMCS

(Banning) Act, 1978 have been clubbed together under CBI F.I.R.

No.19/S/2014. In fact, the F.I.Rs were lodged against the officials of

M/s. Green Ray Group of companies for having illegally collected huge

// 2 //

amount of money from persons assuring them of high returns and later

for its misappropriation.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

accused who works as a Manager in the alleged company at its Jaleswar

office has been charge sheeted by CBI vide Supplementary Charge Sheet

No.03 dated 15^th September, 2020 and according to the allegations in

the F.I.R., a sum of Rs.14,07,254/- was siphoned off and transferred

from companys9 to his account which is not clarified, as to if, it was on

the heads of salary or bonus or to be the ill-gotten money collected from

the customers by the company.

4.

It

is

made

to

understand

that

an amount

of

Rs.45,59,525/- has been seized in connection with the case. It is also

contended that post submission of charge sheet, the petitioner was

arrested on 15^th July, 2021 on execution of warrant of arrest and since

then, he is in judicial custody and the learned Court below by a cryptic

order rejected his bail plea without appreciating the facts and law.

5.

A jurisdictional indiscretion is alleged by the learned

counsel for the petitioner by urging that the case of the accused is

squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of

Aman Preet Singh v. CBI decided in Criminal Appeal No.929 of 2021

arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.5234 of 2021. It is further contended

that the petitioner was never arrested during the investigation of the case

but was finally charge sheeted by the CBI and the learned Court below

without any justification straightaway issued a warrant of arrest on the

strength of which he was apprehended, arrested and then, was

remanded to judicial custody which is in flagrant violation of the law

laid down in Aman Preet Singh case (supra).

6.

Learned counsel for the CBI, on the contrary, justified the

impugned order dated 23^rd August, 2021 and contended that the

petitioner bei