Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 697 (ORI)

Jinu @ Jitendra Kumar Prashan v. State Of Orissa

2018-07-30

D.DASH, S.K.MISHRA

body2018
ORDER S.K.Mishra, J. - This matter has been referred by the Single Judge Bench and assigned to this Division Bench (Larger Bench) to give opinion on the issue as to whether an appeal lies against the order passed by the Designated court under the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as "the OPID Act" for brevity") rejecting the application for bail or an application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 is maintainable. 2. The learned Single Judge has taken into consideration the provisions of Section 13 of the OPID Act which reads as follows: "Appeal-Any person including the Competent Authority, if aggrieved by an order of the Designated Court, may prefer an appeal to the High Court within thirty days from the date of the order." 3. The learned Single Judge has further taken note of the provisions of Section 15 (2) of the OPID Act which reads as follows: "The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall, so far as may be, apply to the proceedings before a Designated Court and for the purposes of the said provisions, a Designated Court shall be deemed to be a Magistrate." 4. A conjoint reading of both the provisions reveal that the procedures and powers of the Designated court are to be guided by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 like the trial is to be conducted by a Magistrate. Sub-Section (2) of Section 15 of the OPID Act specifically provides that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall, so far as may be, apply to the proceedings before a Designated Court and for the purposes of the said provisions, a Designated Court shall be deemed to be a Magistrate. There appears to be no confusion in this matter. 5. Since the Chapter XXXIII of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for bail and bonds and the OPID Act does not have the provisions with regard to grant bail, the general provisions for bail as enshrined in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall govern the field. 6. There appears to be no confusion in this matter. 5. Since the Chapter XXXIII of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for bail and bonds and the OPID Act does not have the provisions with regard to grant bail, the general provisions for bail as enshrined in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall govern the field. 6. Hence, we are of the considered view that if an order is passed in disposing of an application for bail of an accused alleged to have committed an offence under the OPID Act, the aggrieved party may file application before this Court under section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 7. With such observations, the reference of the learned Single Judge is disposed of. 8. The matter be listed before the appropriate Bench accordingly. 9. Order accordingly.