DEEPAK GUPTA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the third successive bail application of the petitioner Deepak Gupta under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No. 30 of 2013 corresponding to V.G.R. Case No.5 of 2013 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Keonjhar.

(2.) The first charge sheet dated 31.12.2013 indicates against the petitioner as follows:-

(3.) Mr. Asok Mohanty, Senior Advocate being ably assisted by Mr. Gouri Mohan Rath, learned counsels appearing for the petitioner emphatically contended that it is the prosecution case that the petitioner acting as the agent/power of attorney holder of two mining lessees namely B.K. Mohanty and Jagdish Mishra has carried out illegal mining operation and sold the mineral thereby making illegal gain and loss to the public exchequer. It is contended that acting in good faith and accepting the words of both the mining lessees that the renewal of mining lease is a matter of course, the petitioner conducted mining operation initially over the leasehold area of B.K. Mohanty. Subsequently, there arose a boundary dispute between B.K. Mohanty and another Jagdish Mishra who happens to be an adjacent mining lessee. Such dispute having been resolved among B.K. Mohanty and Jagdish Mishra after a joint physical verification held in presence of representative of both the lesses and mining officers of Joda, a power of attorney was executed by Jagdish Mishra in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner as an agent followed the words of his principals who are the mining lessees. The alleged benefit/usufruct, if any, accrued out of the transaction also accrued to the said mining lessees. Hence, the petitioner is a victim of misstatement of facts represented to him by both the mining lessees.