Balidi @ Ballidi Chandra Sekhar vs. State Of Odisha

1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.

The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.20 of 2025 pending on the file of the learned S.D.J.M., Umerkote, arising out of Umerkote P.S. Case No.09 of 2025, for the alleged commission of offence under Section 406/420/465/468/471/506 of IPC read with Section 66(C) of the I.T. Act.

The allegation against the Petitioner is defalcation to the tune of Rs.1,29,37,053/- which was to be paid towards GST dues of the informant firm. It is borne out from the record that the Petitioner was running a GST facilitation center and misusing the access, he had committed the alleged offence.

So far as the quantum is concerned, the same is contested by the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State as well as Informant Oppose the prayer for pre-arrest bail inter alia on the ground that there are materials to indicate that the amount which was handed over to the Petitioner for payment of GST was transferred to the accounts of Petitioner as well as the accounts of his mother.

Learned counsel for the State has drawn the attention of this Court from the Case Diary to the notice issued to the Informant by the GST authorities regarding non-payment of GST dues for the period in question i.e. from April, 2020 till March, 2021. 7. Taking note of the nature of offence committed and its societal ramification and keeping in view the latest dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Serious Fraud Investigation Office Vrs. Aditya Sarda, reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 764, this Court is not inclined to entertain the ABLAPL for pre- arrest bail.

Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of.

Interim order stands vacated.