Manish Malik vs. State Of Delhi
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Manish Malik, sought anticipatory bail in FIR No. 148/2024 registered under Sections 407/419/420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The complainant, Dr. Mithun N.K., alleged that he hired the petitioner's company, M.P. Trans Packers and Movers, to transport his car from Delhi to Mumbai. He paid INR 10,500 initially, followed by INR 12,500 and another INR 12,500 for alleged parking charges, totaling INR 35,500. Despite payments, the car was not delivered. The petitioner allegedly demanded an additional INR 30,000. The vehicle was later found at the petitioner's residence. A payment receipt with a GSTIN (06BTAPK7862C1ZT) was found to be fake, and the company registration number was also fake. The petitioner claimed he was an agent for Dubey Packers and Movers and that the GST registration of M.P. Trans Packers and Movers belonged to Mr. Ravi Kant. He stated the complainant asked to cancel delivery while the vehicle was in transit and offered to return the amount paid.
Held
The Court held that the Petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail. The Court noted that the issue regarding the fake GST registration of Dubey Packers and Movers could be examined through electronic records with the GST office, independent of the Petitioner's custodial interrogation. The Court emphasized that while anticipatory bail is not granted routinely, it should be considered when the accused has joined the investigation, is cooperating, and does not pose a flight risk. The Petitioner had appeared for interaction on previous dates and undertook to cooperate with the investigation. The vehicle had also been recovered. Therefore, custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary. The Petitioner was admitted to anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety, subject to conditions including cooperation with the investigation, not leaving the country without informing the IO, not tampering with evidence, and making a deposit of Rs. 35,500 to the complainant within 30 days.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust, and the alleged fake GST documentation? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the FIR was based on conjectures and surmises. He clarified his role as an agent for Dubey Packers and Movers and stated the GST registration in question belonged to another entity. He claimed the complainant requested cancellation of delivery mid-transit and that the vehicle has been recovered. He offered to refund the INR 35,500 paid. He contended that a prior successful transportation of the complainant's motorbike indicated a misunderstanding rather than wrongdoing. Respondent's (State's) Arguments: The prosecution argued that custodial interrogation was necessary due to the alleged fake GST documentation and the petitioner absconding. They strongly opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.
Sections Cited
Section 438, Section 407, Section 419, Section 420
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 07.01.2025 CRL.M.A. 18163/2024 (Exemption)
Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.
The Applicant shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. CRL.M.(BAIL) 1000/2024
The present application seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 148/2024 under Section 407/419/420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station R.K. Puram.
In brief, the case as presented by the Prosecution is as follows:
The afore-noted FIR was registered on behalf of the complaint made This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/06/2025 at 23:57:21 by Dr. Mithun N.K., a Doctor of All India Institute of Medical Sciences Hospital, Delhi.
The Complainant alleges that he contacted M.P. Trans Packers and Movers through online mode for transportation of his car bearing No. KL13AV8274 from Delhi to Mumbai. For this transportation, the Complainant was given to understand that the charges would be Rs. 23,000/- for the transportation. For this purpose, he handed over the car to the Petitioner at R.K. Puram, Delhi for transportation to Mumbai. Initially, he made a payment of INR 10,500/- through UPI and on 18th April, 2024, a further payment of INR 12,500/- was made. The Petitioner allegedly informed the Complainant that the delivery would be made by 28th April, 2024.
On 11th May, 2024, the Complainant made another payment of INR 12,500/- through UPI as he was informed that the same are parking charges applicable.
Despite the payment, the Complainant’s vehicle was not moved from Delhi to Mumbai. Instead, the Petitioner made a further demand of INR 30,000/- from the Complainant. The Complainant alleges that despite making the payments as per the agreed amount, the Petitioner has been demanding extra payments. In this background, he lodged the aforenoted FIR.
During investigation, the vehicle finally found parked at the Petitioner’s residence at village and post – Parsaul, Police Station Sankaur, District, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. The car was seized, however, the Petitioner absconded. The Prosecution also found a payment receipt bearing the address and GSTIN 06BTAPK7862C1ZT, which was found to This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/06/2025 at 23:57:21 be fake and registered on the name of M.P. Trans Packers and Movers. It was also revealed that the registration number of the company was also found to be fake.
In such circumstances, the Prosecution states that custodial interrogation is necessary and strongly oppose the Petitioner’s request for anticipatory bail.
On the other hand, counsel for the Petitioner urges that the impugned order is based on conjectures and surmises. He also clarifies that that the Petitioner is an agent of Dubey Packers and Movers and the GST registration of M.P. Trans Packers and Movers in the name of Mr. Ravi Kant. The Complainant asked the Petitioner to cancel the delivery even though the vehicle was already in transit. He further submits that the vehicle of the Complainant has been handed over to the Investigating Officer. In any event, the Petitioner without prejudice to his rights, is willing to return the amount of INR 35,500/- to the Complainant which is alleged to have been paid in total. He further submits that even in the past, the Petitioner has successfully transported motorbike belonging to the Complainant from Delhi to Mumbai. In such circumstances, this is a case of only misunderstanding and no wrongdoing on his part.
The Court has considered the afore-noted contentions.
On 7th June, 2024, the Petitioner was granted interim anticipatory bail on the conditions delineated therein. Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Petitioner has since then appeared for interaction on 7th June, 2024 and 8th June, 2024. Further, the Petitioner undertakes to appear before Investigating Officer as and when directed. Moreover, the vehicle in question has been recovered from the house of the Petitioner. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/06/2025 at 23:57:21 9. The issue regarding the documentation pertaining to GST registration of Dubey Packers and Movers being fake is to be examined on the basis of the electronic record available with the GST office. This can easily be done independent of the Petitioner’s co-operation and custodial interrogation is not necessary.
Undoubtedly, anticipatory bail is not to be granted routinely, however, in cases where the accused has joined investigation and has been co- operating with the investigation agencies and not posing any threat of absconding, custodial interrogation ought to be avoided.
Considering the above, the present application is allowed and the Petitioner is admitted to Anticipatory Bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of Duty MM/IO to the following conditions: a) The Petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer of the case as and when required; b) The applicant shall not leave the boundaries of the country without informing the IO/ SHO concerned; c) The applicant shall not contact the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; d) The Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case; e) The Petitioner shall provide his/her mobile number(s) to the Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all times; f) In case of change of residential address and/or mobile number, the petitioner shall intimate the same to the Investigating Officer/Court concerned by way of an affidavit. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/06/2025 at 23:57:21 g) The Petitioner shall make a deposit of Rs. 35,500/- to the Complainant within a period of 30 days. For the payment, the Petitioner shall coordinate with the Investigating Officer. In the event, the Complainant is not inclined to accept the payment, the same may be deposited to the concerned trial Court.
With the above directions, the present application is disposed of. SANJEEV NARULA, J JANUARY 7, 2025/ab This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/06/2025 at 23:57:21
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.