Orissa High Court Denies Bail To Raja Chakra & Another In Alleged Fraud Of ₹175 Crores Linked To Gandhamardan Mines

The Orissa High Court on Friday (October 31) denied bail to youth leader of Biju Janata Dal (BJD) Soumya Sankar Chakra alias Raja Chakra and another man accused of misappropriating Rs. 175 crores by receiving disproportionately high payment for commercial transactions made with a society created for undertaking developmental works around Gandhamardan mine affected areas.

Considering gravity of the financial fraud and noting a number of criminal antecedents, the Bench of Justice Gourishankar Satapathy refused to release the petitioners from custody by observing –

“…taking into account the magnitude of the financial fraud and the propensity of the petitioners for the alleged crime and considering the totality of the materials collected by the investigating agency, this Court considers it undesirable to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage, especially when the trial is yet to commence and material witnesses are yet to be examined.”

The prosecution case against the petitioners was that they misappropriated huge public money amounting approximately to Rs. 175 crores in between the financial years 2017-18 to 2023-24 from one society namely Gandhamardan Loading Agency and Transporting Co-operative Society Ltd, Suakati, Keonjhar, which was created for the development of the affected villages of Gandhamardan Mines, Putulipani Mines and Khandadhar mines.

An amount to the tune of Rs.12,90,74,000/- was allegedly withdrawn from the account of the society through a close associate of the petitioner Soumya Sankar Chakra @ Raja, who is also the proprietor of Shankar Roadways and Shankar Minerals.

Further, the bank account statements of the society revealed a transfer of around Rs.1,60,87,000/- to the account of Shankar Roadways and on further the scrutiny of three bank accounts of the society, it was unveiled that the society transferred a sum of Rs.9,39,38,000/- to a petrol pump.

The owner of the aforesaid petrol pump, however, stated that the society has never taken any fuel from his pump, rather the petitioner Raja Chakra had taken fuel for three agencies on credit basis and the cost of the fuel was paid through cheques of the society for a sum of Rs.9,39,38,000/-.

So far as the petitioner Susanta Kumar Samal was concerned, the petitioner himself allegedly admitted to have drawn 51 self-cheques of the society for a total amount of Rs.12,90,74,000/-, which has been withdrawn by co-accused persons towards periphery development. Surprisingly, officials like BDOs of Banspal and Keonjhar Sadar so also the Regional Manager, Odisha Mining Corporation (OMC) reported no periphery development by the society.

Further, sums of Rs.1,64,79,768/- and Rs.10,34,000/- were transferred to the account of the petitioner from the account of the society but the petitioner failed to give any satisfactory explanation for such withdrawals.

The petitioners vehemently refuted the allegations of financial embezzlement, which according to them were mere commercial transaction. Further, they argued that the prosecution case mainly stands on documentary evidence, which are already in the safe custody of the investigating agency. Moreover, taking into account the number of prosecution witnesses to be examined and considering the fact that the trial is yet to commence, they prayed for bail.

Upon hearing the rival contentions, Justice Satapathy stressed on fourteen criminal antecedents against the petitioner Raja Chakra and one against the petitioner Susanta Samal to hold that the petitioners are in a position to influence the witnesses in the trial, if released on bail.

Also, relying upon Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI (2013) and CBI v. Ramendu Chattopadhyay (2019), he held that in cases involving large scale financial fraud of public money, the Court ought to be more cautious in admitting the accused on bail. Since the case against the petitioners was for misappropriation of huge amount of public money over a period of seven financial years, the Court was not inclined to grant bail.

Case Title: Susanta Kumar Samal v. State of Odisha | Soumya Sankar Chakra @ Raja v. State of Odisha

Case No: BLAPL Nos. 7534 and 7952 of 2025

Date of Order: October 31, 2025

Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Ashok Parija, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Arnav Behera, Advocate for Petitioner Susanta Kumar Samal; Mr. C. Kanungo, Advocate along with Mr. A. Mohanty, Advocate for Petitioner Soumya Sankar Chakra

Counsel for the State: Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak, Addl. Public Prosecutor

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 146

Click Here To Read/Download Order