Nayapalli police on Friday arrested Ajit Sahu, son of former Odisha minister Nrusingha Sahu, from an apartment in Nayapalli’s Nuasahi area. The arrest followed a warrant issued by Delhi’s Patiala House Court after Sahu failed to appear in a 2024 cheating case linked to MP Sujit Kumar.
Police said a complaint was lodged at Tughlak Road police station in Delhi in 2024. The allegation: Sahu promised to arrange land for the MP and cheated him. Investigators registered a case and issued repeated court summons. When Sahu did not appear, the court declared him a proclaimed offender and issued a warrant. That warrant was executed in Bhubaneswar.
After being brought to Nayapalli police station, Sahu spoke to the media and rejected the charge in full. He said he received no court notice, had been living in Bhubaneswar for about three months, and was not absconding. “There was no land fraud. The claim of a Rs 2-crore cheat and a land deal is false,” he said.
According to Sahu, the dispute is over money he borrowed from Sujit Kumar around 2022–23, when the MP was still in the Biju Janata Dal. The two, he said, had worked together for eight to ten years. He claimed he had already repaid 75 percent of the amount and given a written assurance for the remaining 25 percent. Lawyers for both sides, he added, have been discussing a repayment timeline.
Sahu further said he had explained his business plans to the MP in person. Later, he alleged, he was asked to sign papers so the remaining money could be recovered. Treating Sujit Kumar as an elder brother, he signed without reading them. The case, he claimed, surfaced after the MP left the BJD and joined another party.
Police, for their part, have confined themselves to the warrant and the Delhi case record. Sahu was taken into custody for questioning. Further legal steps, including production before court and possible transit to Delhi, will depend on the next orders.
The episode now sits at the intersection of a criminal complaint, a personal loan claim, and a political relationship that has clearly soured. Whether the courts treat it as cheating over land or a private money dispute will be decided on documents, not on the statements traded at the police station.
