CUTTACK, India, May 19 -- Orissa High Court issued the following order on April 17:
1. Since the issues raised in both the above-mentioned CRLMCs involve common questions of fact and law, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience and effective adjudication, CRLMC No.3815 of 2024 is treated as the lead case.
2. The Petitioner, in CRLMC No.3815 of 2024, has made a prayer to quash the initiation of criminal proceeding against her in connection with Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No.4 of 2011 corresponding to T.R. Case No.33 of 2013 pending in the court of the learned Special Judge Vigilance, Balasore.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
(i) One Nagendra Prasad Nayak, OPS, DSP, while serving as SDPO Bonai in Rourkela Police District, was subjected to a simultaneous Vigilance search and seizure operation at six locations on 28.12.2010, on the strength of search warrants issued by the learned C.J.M., Balasore vide Misc. Case No.13 of 2010. Consequent thereupon, Sri B.C. Sethi, DSP, Vigilance, Jajpur Unit lodged an FIR in Balasore Vigilance Police Station on 04.02.2011, which was registered as Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No.4 of 2011 under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 109/420/120-B of the IPC. The FIR was registered against four persons, namely, Sri Nagendra Prasad Nayak (A-1), Ajit Patnaik, late Gobinda Chandra Nayak (father of A-1), and Prasanta Kumar Nayak (brother of A-1). A chargesheet (No.41 of 2012) was subsequently submitted on 29.09.2012 under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the P.C. Act, 1988 and Sections 109/420/467/468/409/120-B of the IPC, which culminated in T.R. Case No.33 of 2013 in the court of the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Balasore.
(ii) The investigation revealed that Sri Nagendra Prasad Nayak (husband of the Petitioner in CRLMC No.3815 of 2024) had accumulated assets disproportionate to his known sources of income during the check period from 02.04.1982 to 28.12.2010. The assets taken into consideration by the Vigilance officials comprised both movable and immovable properties. The immovable property was estimated at Rs.39,26,000/- and the movable property at Rs.1,24,96,467/-, totalling Rs.1,53,66,467/-. The disproportionate assets were calculated at 698%. (iii) The Petitioner in CRLMC No.3815 of 2024, Smt. Bijay Laxmi Nayak (arrayed as A-5), is the wife of A-1. She was not named in the FIR. As per the chargesheet, on the date of search she was present at her paternal house at Keonjhar and was found in possession of gold and silver ornaments on her person valued at approximately Rs.1,17,600/-, a plot of land admeasuring 0.08 decimals at Baniapat, Keonjhar with a building valued at approximately Rs.15,02,609/-, cash of Rs.4,900/-, a bank balance of Rs.5,356/- in SBI Bargarh Branch, and insurance premiums of Rs.4,49,800/- in three Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance policies. The total value of assets as disclosed in the chargesheet and the objection filed by the Vigilance amounts to approximately Rs.19,93,654/-.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=bzPoyUlszYLCUcCpirIpqLSYqhU%2BbuvE4P9ze6AeqTeCgCSkDM5SEcIbbEhuH2hk&caseno=CRLMC/1021/2024&cCode=1&cino=ODHC010232522024&state_code=11&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
