PRINCE RAJ vs STATE OF ODISHA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.5757 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010418712026

(In the matter of application under Section 483 of the BNSS,
2023
).

Prince Raj … Petitioner
-versus-

State of Odisha Opposite Party
…



For Petitioner : Mr. B.R. Tripathy, Advocate

For Opposite Party : Mr. S.C. Pradhan, Addl. PP


CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY




DATE OF HEARING & DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03.09.2026 (ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.
1. This is the bail application U/S.483 of the BNSS
by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with
Cyber Crime (CID) P.S. Case No. 11 of 2025
corresponding to C.T. Case No. 494 of 2025 pending in
the Court of learned SDJM, Bhubaneswar, for
commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 318(4)/ 319(2)/
336(2)(3)/338/340(2)/61(2)/3(5) BNS read with Section
66(C)(D) of I.T. Act.
2. The background facts of the case in gist are
that the complainant Sambhram Das was added by a
BLAPL No. 5757 of 2026
Page 1 of 5

stranger to WhatsApp group named “F-31-Raushan VIP
Investment Alliance” and then he joined a new group
named “VIP 760 Raushan Kumar Exchange group”.
Accordingly, on the guidance and advice by the admin of
said group, the petitioner invested money to the tune of
Rs.2,06,07,500/-, but later he realized that he has been
deceived by way of online financial fraud as he was not
allowed to withdraw his investment.
Accordingly, Sambhram Das lodged an FIR
which was registered in Cyber Crime (CID) P.S. Case No.
11 of 2025 and the matter was investigated into, but in
the course of investigation, it was unearthed that out of
such investment, a sum of Rs.40,32,500/- was found to
be deposited to the Bandhan Bank account No.
10200001767490 of Maa Bhagabati Garments, whose
proprietor is the petitioner from the account of the
informant maintained at Development Bank of Singapore
(DBS). On finding aforesaid incriminating materials, the
petitioner was taken into custody, but he became
unsuccessful in securing his liberty before the learned
Sessions Court and thereby, he is before this Court in
BLAPL No. 5757 of 2026
Page 2 of 5

this bail application. In the meantime, charge sheet has
already been submitted.
3. In the course of hearing, Mr. Biwajit Ranjan
Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner by placing
the facts as stated in the FIR submits that there is
nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner has ever
allured the informant to invest money nor had he
contacted the informant so as to invest money and
thereby, the petitioner has no link in the investment
made by the informant, but even for the sake for
argument, considering the account of the Maa Bhagabati
Garments to be involved in this case and the petitioner
being the proprietor thereof, no case of forgery can be
made out against the petitioner, since the petitioner has
neither any knowledge nor has he made any transaction
with such account of Maa Bhagabati Garments and
thereby, the petitioner being innocent, he may kindly be
granted bail.
3.1. On the other hand, Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned
Addl. PP by placing the facts of the case submits that not
only the petitioner is involved in this case, but also five
BLAPL No. 5757 of 2026
Page 3 of 5

complaints have been linked with the account of the Maa
Bhagabati Garments, which stands in the name of the
petitioner and thereby, the petitioner’s bail application
may kindly be rejected.
4. After having considered the rival submissions
upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against
the petitioner for receiving Rs.40,32,500/- in the
account of Maa Bhagabati Garments whose proprietor is
the present petitioner and such account of Maa
Bhagabati Garments is linked with five complaints as per
NCR Portal (Samanvaya Portal). No doubt, the charge
sheet has already been filed in this case, but the
transaction to the Maa Bhagabati Garments, whose
proprietor is the present petitioner itself discloses the
allegation against the petitioner.
5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and
on consideration of materials placed on record together
with complaint received against the account standing in
the name of Maa Bhagabati Garments, whose proprietor
is the present petitioner, this Court is not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
BLAPL No. 5757 of 2026
Page 4 of 5

6. Hence, the bail application of the petitioners
stands rejected. Accordingly, the bail application stands
disposed of. In view of the alternative oral prayer as
advanced for the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to
renew his prayer for bail after examination of some
witnesses. A soft copy of this judgment be immediately
transmitted to the Court in seisin over the matter for
reference.

(G. Satapathy)
Judge












Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
rd
Dated the 3 day of September, 2026/S.Sasmal


Signature Not Verified
BLAPL No. 5757 of 2026
Page 5 of 5

Digitally Signed
Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 03-Sep-2026 20:03:03