p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.12432 of 2024 Manabhanjan Tandi …. Petitioner Mr.P. Mishra, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. T.K. Acharya, ASC Mr. J. K. Mohapatra, Advocate for the Informant CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 30.01.2025 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Acharya, learned ASC for the State. 2. Instant petition under Section 483 BNSS is filed for release of the petitioner on bail in connection with C.T. Case No.459 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Sessions Judge, Boudh corresponding to Boudh P.S. Case No.382 of 2024 on the grounds stated therein. 3. Perused the F.I.R. and the rejection order as at Annexures-1 and 2 respectively. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no material on record especially the statements of the customers alleging any such mischief in the hands of the petitioner. It is, however, submitted that with regard to the amount misappropriated by the petitioner, it stands at Rs.1,28,150/- allegedly received as remittances from the clients of the informant. Considering the same and since the petitioner worked as an employee under the informant and has remained in judicial custody for nearly five months with the closure of investigation and p. 2 submission of chargesheet, it is further submitted that he should be allowed to go on bail with any conditions. 5. Learned counsel for the informant, on the other hand, opposed released of the petitioner on bail since he and other accused persons did the mischief and misappropriated the deposits received from its client. 6. Mr. Acharya, learned ASC for the State equally opposed release of the petitioner on bail since a prima facie case is made out against him with the filing of the chargesheet. 7. Gone through the contents of the F.I.R. as at Annexure-1. The Court finds that the petitioner said to have received the deposits after being collected from the customers of the informant with an amount of Rs.1,28,150/-. The said amount is alleged to have been misappropriated without being deposited with the informant. Similar allegations are also made against two other accused persons, who were the employees of the informant like the petitioner. Having regard to the nature of allegations as made to reveal from the F.I.R. with the filing of the chargesheet against the petitioner and him having remained in custody since 24th October, 2024, the Court is of the view that he should be allowed to go on bail with stringent conditions keeping in view the objections of learned counsels for the informant as well as the State. 8. Hence, it is ordered. 9. In the result, the petition under Section 483 BNSS stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.T. Case No.459 of 2024 arising out of Boudh P.S. Case No.382 of 2024 subject to him furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties (one of whom to be a blood relation) for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Boudh, who shall p. 3 be at liberty to 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 deposit an amount of Rs.30,000/-(rupees thirty thousand ) to be received by the finance company and to furnish an undertaking to pay back the balance amount from Rs.1,28,150/- in installments on the terms fixed by the Court below. 10. The BLAPL is disposed of. 11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Balaram Designation: Personal Assistant