IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 9889 of 2024 Prasanta Kumar Nayak …. Petitioner Mr. B.Mohanty, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. P.K. Mohanty, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 15.01.2025 03. 1. Heard Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sahoo, learned AGA for the State. 2. Instant petition under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is filed for release of the petitioner on bail in connection with G.R. Case No. 1590 of 2024 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Berhampur corresponding to Cyber Crime P.S. Case No.42 of 2024 on the grounds stated 3. Perused the F.I.R. as at Annexure-1 and the rejection order i.e. Annexure-2. 4. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an employee of the bank and he has been implicated with the allegation of being in connivance with the accused persons which is not true. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 5th August, 2024 and in the meantime, chargesheet has been filed though further investigation is pending, he should be allowed to go on bail subject to any conditions. Page 2 of 3 5. Ms. Naidu, learned counsel for the informant strongly opposed release of the petitioner on bail since he is one of the accused persons who is equally responsible for the digital arrest. 6. Mr. Sahoo, learned AGA for the State would submit that the petitioner alleged to have had contact with the co-accused, namely, Asish Kumar Dalasingharay which has been revealed during investigation and in view of such involvement, he should not be allowed to go on bail pending further investigation. 7. Gone through the contents of the F.I.R. as at Annexure-1. The Court finds that an amount of Rs. 26 lac and some odd has been siphoned off from the account of the informant. It is alleged that the said amount has been received by the principal accused, namely, Dibyajyoti Rath, who is stated to be in judicial custody now. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, the Court finds that he was an employee of the bank concerned and opened the account and alleged to have agreed to receive commission with respect to the illicit transaction, hence, stands implicated. Considering the fact that the investigation is concluded as against him and there is a remote chance of his abscondence being an official of the bank, the Court is of the view that he should be allowed to go on bail subject to following conditions. 8. Accordingly, it is ordered. 9. In the result, the petition under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with G.R. Case No. 1590 of 2024 corresponding to Cyber Crime P.S. Case No.42 of 2024 subject to him furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/-(rupees forty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM, Berhampur, who shall impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case besides the following, such as, he shall attend the P.S. and report the I.O. once in a week for the purpose of investigation and continue to do so, till the same is concluded. 10. The BLAPL is disposed of. 11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. kabita (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge