p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.11360 of 2025 Alla Varaha Ramakrishna Satya Srinivasarao …. Petitioner Mr. S. R. Mohanty, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha (OPID) …. Opposite Party Mr. A.K. Nayak, Counsel for the OPID AND ABLAPL No.11361 of 2025 Malla Aruna Kumari …. Petitioner Mr. S. R. Mohanty, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha (OPID) …. Opposite Party Mr. A.K. Nayak, Counsel for the OPID CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 29.01.2026 04. 1. Both the ABLAPLs are disposed of by the following common order. 2. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 3. Instant petitions have been filed under Section 482 BNSS by the petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with E.O.W. P.S. Case No.12 of 2019 corresponding to C.T. p. 2 Case No.4 of 2019 pending in the court of learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under the OPID Act, Cuttack on the grounds stated. 4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are non-operational Directors of the company in question and are similarly situated like the co- accused in ABLAPL No.12412 of 2021, hence, parity should be extended. A copy of the said order is at Annexure-7 in respect of the co-accused, namely, Vinjamuri Sandhya Valli. Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID would submit that the petitioners are the full-time Directors of the company and are responsible for receiving the deposits and had earlier approached this Court in ABLAPL Nos.12081 and 12433 of 2021 disposed of on 27th March, 2023 and there is no change in circumstances at present in spite of the order in ABLAPL No.12412 of 2021. A copy of the common order in the ABLAPLs in respect of the petitioners dated 27th March, 2023 is produced at the time of hearing by Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID. 5. Perused the FIR at Annexure-1 and gone through the allegations made therein. It is claimed that the company has returned money to the depositors as and when it was approached. From the FIR i.e. Annexure-1, the Court finds that the company floated various schemes and received deposits from the investors promising them of higher return. The petitioners admittedly had knocked the doors of this Court in 2021 and while disposing of the ABLAPLs, they were directed to surrender before the court concerned but the same have not p. 3 been availed of and complied with. Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID submits that any such plea for bail referring to Annexure-7 cannot be entertained in view of the earlier order in 2023 by this Court while disposing of the ABLAPLs filed by them. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the present accused persons are on similar footing and have been extending cooperation in the investigation, which is denied by Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the OPID. In response to the above claim, it is informed to the Court that the petitioners responded to the investigation in 2024 and also in 2025 and even recently returned money in respect of some of the depositors, who approached the company. Having regard to the above facts and that the investigation is in progress for quite some time and as the petitioners are the Directors of the company and similarly situated like the co-accused named above, who has been directed to go on bail vide Annexure-7, this Court is of the view that parity should be extended followed by a direction for their release on similar terms and conditions. 6. Accordingly, it is ordered. 7. In the result, the ABLAPLs stand disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to surrender before the learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under the OPID Act, Cuttack within a fortnight from today and in the event, they surrender in compliance thereof, shall be released on bail in connection with C.T. Case No.4 of 2019 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) each with one solvent surety for the like amount each with such other p. 4 conditions imposed similar to the co-accused in terms of Annexure-7. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Balaram Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT