Supreme Court Allows Interim Bail To Odisha IAS Officer Manish Agarwal On Surrender Before Trial Court In Case Over PA's Death

The Supreme Court directed Manish Agarwal, IAS & former Collector of Malkangiri district (Odisha), in a case accused in a case relating to the suspicious death of his Personal Assistant (PA) in the year 2019, to surrender before the trial court and furnish bail bonds to its satisfaction, upon which he shall be released on interim bail.A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta passed the order.This comes after the Orissa High Court on April 28 rejected anticipatory bail to him and some of his staff members. As per brief facts, Deba Narayan Panda (deceased) was working as the PA to Manish Agarwal, IAS, and then Collector, Malkangiri (petitioner herein). He went missing on December 27, 2019, while on duty. On the next day, his dead body was recovered from the Satiguda dam site by fire personnel.Subsequently, post post-mortem was conducted by a team of doctors. The post-mortem report disclosed the cause of death as ante-mortem drowning and its complications. It also revealed that the dead body did not have any injury or mark of violence.While the matter stood thus, on November 13, 2020, the wife of the deceased filed a complaint in the Court of SDJM, Malkangiri, alleging that on the date of the occurrence, her husband went to the residence of the Collector at about 10 AM and never returned thereafter. It was alleged that the then Collector was responsible for the death of the deceased.The SDJM had forwarded the complaint to the police to register an FIR and to conduct an investigation as per Section 156(3) of the CrPC. Upon completion of the investigation, the investigating officer submitted the closure report holding that no foul play was involved in the death of the deceased and that the accused persons had not committed any offence.However, the complainant-wife filed a protest petition against the submission of the final report by the Police. In the said protest petition, she alleged that the matter was not properly investigated and that the involvement of the Collector in the death of the deceased was being deliberately kept under cover.Accordingly, the SDJM had recorded the initial statement of the complainant and based on such statement and other materials on record, took cognisance and postponed the issue of process by deciding to call upon the complainant to produce all her witnesses.Four witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant, whereupon the SDJM directed the complainant to file requisites by an order dated January 11, 2023 and on January 13, 2023, he issued summons to the petitioners to appear before him. Being aggrieved, the petitioner and other accused persons had approached the High Court in 2023, seeking to quash the order of cognizance.While deciding the quashing petition, Justice Sashikanta Mishra had taken note of the facts and observed that the only allegation made by the complainant against the ex-collector was that on April 4, 2018 he had asked the deceased as to who are the people or projects or agencies who contributed money to the Collector either on monthly basis or on work-to-work basis.After examining the available materials, the Court had taken the view that neither the medical evidence nor the petitions and statements of the complainant, so also that of the other witnesses, contained, prima facie, any evidence to even suggest that the death was homicidal in nature.So far as the charge of abetment to suicide was concerned, the Court had highlighted that even the prosecution accepted that the deceased was upset because of his service matters which was strong enough to push him to commit suicide.Therefore, the Court had modified the charges by striking down the charges under Section 302 and 506 IPC and sustaining the imputations under Sections 306/120-B/34 IPC, as enough materials existed to proceed against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences.The aforesaid order of the High Court was challenged by the ex-collector by way of filing a special leave petition (SLP). In November 2024, a Division Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Aravind Kumar had declined to interfere with the order of the High Court, which cleared the path for the trial of the petitioner for abetment to suicide of his deceased PA.Earlier this year, the SDJM, Malkangiri had issued non-bailable warrant (NBW) observing that the accused cannot seek exemption from personal appearance as a matter of right. It required him to remain personally present on the first date and to give proof of his identity to the satisfaction of the Court and only then seek exemption from personal appearance during the trial before the Sessions Court.The SDJM had posted the case to February 28 for execution of the NBW and production of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had filed a revision petition before the High Court seeking a stay of the NBW and also praying for a direction to the trial Court to allow him to appear through an Advocate, instead of personal appearance, as per the provisions ...

Supreme Court Allows Interim Bail To Odisha IAS Officer Manish Agarwal On Surrender Before Trial Court In Case Over PA's Death

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags