Shrianil v. Narela

1 By these petitions,the petitioner seeks anticipatory bailin caseFIR Nos.407/2018 & 408/2018 registered at PS Narela under Sections 420/406/120-B IPG. The FIRs in question have been registered by the authorized representative of M/s,Universal Polychem India Pth^ Ltd allegingthattheDirectorsofFirm M/s.M.P.TelelinksinFIRNo.407/20I[8] andDirectorsofM/s,KrishnaElectricalIndustriesLtd.inFIRNo.408/2018 which aresisterconcernshavecheatedthecomplainant.

2 Itisallegedthatpetitioneralong with otherDirectorsofthecompany approached the complainant at its Narela office who purchased PVC compounds. Theallegedpersonsensuredtimelypaymentagainstsuppyo goods. Believingthe assuranceoftheaccused materials manufactured by the complainant were delivered at the factories ofthe alleged companies fromtimetotimeandcorrespondinginvoiceswereraised. Itisallegedthat forthesalesoftheyear2013-14quaM/s.KrishnaElectricalIndustriesLtd., the outstanding dues were.1,87,90,993/- as on 14^ August,2014 attd. againstthe salesinthe year2014to2015 quathefirm M/s.M.P.Telel.nks Ud.theoutstandingdueswere.44,48,492/-ason25-^May,2018andthus the complainantwascheated.

V. ■' invoices etc. Learned counsel for thepetitioner submits that petitioner has joined the investigation as and when directed and the only investigation carried out is pressurizing the petitioner to settle the matter with the complainant. He states that the last transaction between the petitioner's company andthecomplainantwason3H'July,2014as far asM/s.Krishna ElectricalIndustriesLtd. andIS"May, 2014 quaM/s.M.P.TelelinksLtd. asper the averments inthe suits filed. Learned counsel for thepetitioner submits that only after the complainant availed theremedies of windingup of the companies and fileda civil suit andcouldnot settle thematter with the petitioner the twoFIRsinquestionwere lodgedtoputpressure onthe petitioner. He states that the petitioner's company had been doing the business withthecomplainantforthelast10yearsandoncontinuoussupply ofgoodsmoney wasbeinggiven. He states thatreconciliationofaccounts is merely a civil dispute and cannot be given the colour of a criminal dispute.

4 This Court has heardlearned counsel for the petitioner,complainant andlearnedAPP fortheStateatlength. Asnotedabove,thelasttransaction ofM/s.KrishnaElectricalIndustriesLtd.withthecomplainantcompany was till3L'July,2014 andwithM/s/M.P.TelelinksLtd.istill IS'"May,2014. The complaints have been lodged in June, 2018. The plea taken by learnedAPP for the Statethatthepetitioner's companieshadno capacity to pay asthey were declaredNPAs showsthattheirintentionwasofcheating thecomplainantisprimafacienotsubstantiatedasonaspecificqueryputby V...' whereas M/s.Krishna Electrical Industries Ltd. has been declared NPA on 30* June,2015. 5, ThisCourthasgonethroughthenoticeissuedtothepetitionerbythe InvestigatingOfficerwhereinthedocumentssoughtfromthepetitionerwere thePAN Card,Passportdetails,copyoftheITreturnsofthe year2013-15, detailsofthe bankaccountand detailsofbooksofaccount. Admittedlyall these documents have since been supplied as the petitioner hasjoined the investigation. There is no material to show that as on July, 2014 qua M/sKrishnaEiectricalIndustriesLtd.andonMay,2014quaM.P.Telelinks, there were nofundsinthe accountsbecause both the companieshave been declared NPAsnearly one yearthereafter. 6, Further the petitioner has placed on record accounts statement between the parties which show that a running account was going on between 10'^February,2013to31"July,2014andapproximately 1.2crores have bene paid to the complainant's company. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inter-se the Directors there was an arbitration instituted whereon an award was finalized on 17 September, execution whereofhasbeen filed in2018 by aco-accused. Intermsofthe award,the petitioner has given up all his rights and liabilities in the two companies which goto hisbrother.

7 Considering the allegations and the facts as noted above,this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is, therefore, directedthatintheeventofarrest,the petitionerbe releasedonbail SHO concerned further subjectto the condition that petitioner willjointhe investigationasandwhendirectedandwillnotleavethecountry withoutthe priorpermissionoftheCourtconcernedandincaseofchangeofresidential address,the same will be intimated to the Court concerned by way ofan affidavit.

8. Petitions are disposed of.

9. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA,J. JANUARY 29,2019 Mamta