Dipak Meher vs State Of Orissa

G. Satapathy, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Crime Branch P.S. (Special Task Force) Case No.18 of 2023 arising out of G.R. Case No.382 of 2023 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Birmaharajpur, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 489-A/489-B/489-C/120-B of IPC, on the allegation that his elder brother co-accused Tasabanta Meher @ Akha had procured Rs.41,16,000/- (Rupees Fourty one Lakhs Sixteen Thousand) fake currency notes in shape of Rs.500/-denomination on 31.08.2023 and kept the same in his bed room with direction to the petitioner to hand over the same to a customer who will be coming on 01.09.2023 evening by retaining Rs.12,00,000/-(Rupees Twelve Lakhs) from the said customer.

Mr. H.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither any offence U/Ss.498-A to 489-C of IPC nor the offence U/S.120-B of IPC is attracted against the petitioner because there is absolutely no material available on record to indicate that the petitioner has ever counterfeited any currency notes or used the same as genuine or consciously found in possession of such forged and counterfeited currency notes intending to use the same as genuine and that it may be used as genuine. It is further submitted by him that accepting the recovery of fake currency notes from the house of the petitioner, it cannot be attributed to the petitioner because one person of nearby area of Barpali Town being acquainted with the family members of the petitioner had come to their house and requested to keep a bundle for some time which he had promised to take back after some hours and the said person kept the box in their house and the petitioner did not know what was/were the contents of such box, but immediately thereafter police raided the house of the petitioner and searched the box as well as found the fake currency notes, however, the petitioner has no role in the entire transaction. Mr. Mishra by the aforesaid submission has, accordingly, prayed to the Court to grant bail to the petitioner.

On the other hand, Mr. G.N. Rout, learned ASC, however, strongly opposes the bail application of the petitioner by interalia placing the materials on record to the effect that the elder brother of the petitioner had procured the fake currency notes, but the petitioner has knowingly supported him in possessing the fake currency notes in their house and he was supposed to deliver the same to a customer and, accordingly, he was apprehended by the police. Mr. Rout, accordingly, has prayed to reject the bail application of the petitioner by taking into consideration the aforesaid allegation against the petitioner.

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, it is noticed that no material has been collected by the Investigating Agency to indicate that the petitioner had procured the counterfeited notes or has used such notes as genuine one, but prima facie fake currency notes were recovered from the bed room of co-accused Tasabanta Meher @ Akha in the joint family house of the petitioner. Further, the material so far collected in the investigation only go to indicate that the co-accused has directed the petitioner to deliver the fake currency notes to one customer, but before delivery of such notes by the petitioner to the customer, the fake currency notes were recovered from the bed room of the co-accused. It is, however, claimed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no offence is attracted against the petitioner, but the possession of forged and counterfeited currency notes is punishable U/S.489-C of IPC which can be ascertained after evidence is tendered in the course of a full-fledged trial, but not at this stage. It is also not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since 01.09.2023 and in the meanwhile, charge-sheet has already been submitted in this case, but the fake currency notes allegedly recovered from the house is admittedly the joint family house wherein not only the petitioner, but also his parents and the principal accused namely Tasabanta Meher @ Akha reside.

In view of the above facts and circumstance, especially when charge-sheet has already been submitted in this case and the main allegation of procuring the counterfeited currency notes being directed against principal accused Tasabanta Meher @ Akhaa and the petitioner having already suffered incarceration since 01.09.2023 and taking into account the principle that bail is the rule, but jail is the exception, this Court admits the petitioner to bail.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh) only with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-

(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

(ii) the petitioner shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.229-A of IPC in accordance with law,

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case,

(iv) the petitioner shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a week preferably on second Sunday of each month in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for one year from the actual date of release from the custody or till conclusion of the trial whichever is earlier,

(v) the petitioner shall inform the Court in seisin of the case as well as the I.O. as to his place of residence during the trial by providing his mobile number(s), current residential address, e-mail, if any, and other documents in support of proof of his residence. The petitioner shall not change his phone number without taking prior permission of the Court in seisin of the case.

(vi) the petitioner shall appear before the IO/Jurisdictional Police Station as and when required,

(vii) in case the petitioner misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence, proclamation U/S.82 of Cr.P.C. is issued and the petitioner fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the learned trial Court is at liberty to initiate proceeding against them for offence U/S.174-A of the IPC in accordance with law.

The IIC of the Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for similar offences on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

…………………………………