Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.456 of 2025 Dhaneswar Sahoo ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. Milan Kanungo, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Soumya Ranjan Mohanty -versus- State Of Odisha(Vig.) ..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. M.S. Rizvi, ASC appearing for the Vigilance Department CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 16.01.2025 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/ Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Party-Vigilance Department. 3. The present application has been filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No.16 of 2024, corresponding to V.G.R. Case No.06 of 2024, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Balasore, for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(b) of the Page 2 of 3. Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act. 4. It is stated by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner that the Petitioner, who is a Government employee and was working as an Inspector-in-Charge of Police, Balasore Headquarters, has been implicated in the present case for possessing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. He further contended that the Petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation. In such view of the matter, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that there is no scope for the Petitioner to abscond from justice. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department, on the other hand, referring to the instruction vide order dated 13.01.2025 of the Superintendent of Police, Balasore Division, Balasore, submitted that although the custodial detention of the Petitioner is not necessary, however he apprehends that in the event the Petitioner is released on pre-arrest bail, he might abscond from justice and he may not cooperate with the further investigation in this case. On such ground, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department opposed the release of the Petitioner on pre-arrest bail. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the background of the present case, further keeping in view the instruction dated 13.01.2025, although this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner, however it is directed that in the event the Petitioner surrenders before the Court in seisin over the matter within a period of four weeks from today and moves an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the matter shall release Page 3 of 3. him on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. While imposing conditions, the trial court shall also impose conditions whereby the Petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O. as and when his presence is required by the I.O. for the purpose of investigation and produce all required documents in his possession; he shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court in seisin over the mater without prior permission of the court in seisin over the matter till conclusion of the investigation. Violation of any of the conditions imposed either by this Court or the court in seisin over the matter shall entail cancellation of bail. 7. Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Debasis