Bail - Financial fraud committed by Indian citizen outside India in Zambia - Court in India has jurisdiction over offences

Orissa High Court Grants Bail to Indian Citizen Accused of Financial Fraud in Zambia, Soumya Ranjan Panda, accused of embezzling USD 125,000, secures bail under strict conditions; Indian court asserts jurisdiction over overseas offences.

The Orissa High Court, in a landmark decision, has granted bail to Soumya Ranjan Panda, an Indian citizen accused of committing a substantial financial fraud in Zambia. The decision, delivered by Justice G. Satapathy, underscores the court's jurisdiction over offences committed by Indian citizens abroad, as per the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

The case, initiated by a complaint from Dharampal Singla, the Director of FosGro Resources Pvt. Ltd., involved allegations that Panda, while serving as the Finance and Admin Manager, misappropriated funds amounting to USD 125,000. The fraud was reportedly executed through a company Panda fraudulently established in Zambia, named FosGro Resources Ltd., mirroring the name of his employer's partner company.

The court's decision hinged on Section 208 of the BNSS, which permits Indian courts to try offences committed by Indian citizens outside the country's borders, contingent upon receiving prior sanction from the Central Government. Justice Satapathy, while granting bail, highlighted the principle that "bail is the rule, jail is the exception," and noted that the trial proceedings had been stayed, with no immediate requirement for Panda's custodial interrogation.

The bail conditions imposed are stringent. Panda is required to furnish a bail bond of INR 5,00,000 along with two sureties of the same amount. He must refrain from committing similar offences, report monthly to the jurisdictional police station, and provide the court with his current residential details. Additionally, Panda must submit to the jurisdiction of the Zambian court if acquitted in India.

This case also raises intriguing questions about the territorial jurisdiction of Indian courts in prosecuting offences with international elements. While the Orissa High Court has asserted its jurisdiction, it acknowledged the ongoing proceedings against Panda in Zambia, where charges of "Theft by Servants" are pending.

The judgment referenced the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Thota Venkateswarlu v. State of Andhra Pradesh, reinforcing the applicability of Indian laws to citizens' actions abroad. The court clarified that dual proceedings could occur, provided there has been no previous conviction or acquittal for the same offence elsewhere.

As the legal proceedings continue, this case is poised to set significant precedents regarding cross-border criminal accountability and the enforcement of Indian law on international grounds.

Bottom Line:

Bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) - Allegation of financial fraud committed by Indian citizen outside India in Zambia - Court in India has jurisdiction over offences committed by Indian citizens abroad under Section 208 of BNSS, subject to the sanction of the Central Government - Bail granted subject to conditions.

Statutory provisions: Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Sections 208, 483, Section 337 of BNSS (300 of CrPC), Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India.

Soumya Ranjan Panda v. State of Odisha, (Orissa) : Law Finder Doc id # 2820689