Abhishek Singh vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court allowed the bail application. It held that considering the facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the long-standing business transactions between the applicant and complainant since 2018, and the dispute revolving around the supply of goods and GST as evidenced by the ledgers, the matter appeared to be of a civil nature. The Court noted the outstanding balance of Rs. 1,05,68,529/- and the correspondence between the parties regarding this. Citing the Supreme Court's judgment in V.Y. Jose and Another Versus State of Gujarat and Another, the Court also took into account that the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicant's age (32 years), his lack of criminal antecedents, and the admitted low likelihood of tampering or absconding. The Court further considered the potential for trial delays due to COVID-19. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the Court directed the applicant's release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties, subject to several conditions including not tampering with evidence, not prejudicing the trial, appearing on all dates, following COVID-19 protocols, and not involving himself in similar offenses.

Facts

The applicant, Abhishek Singh, is seeking a first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He has been incarcerated since June 13, 2021, in connection with Crime No. 329/2021 registered at Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur, for an alleged offense under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleges that the complainant, Indarpal Singh, manager of H.R. Agency, deposited approximately two crore rupees into the applicant's firm's bank account for goods supply. However, goods worth only Rs. 1,05,68,529/- were supplied, with the remaining amount allegedly not returned. The applicant claims he has been falsely implicated and that the dispute is purely civil in nature, concerning the supply of goods and GST, with the complainant having received goods exceeding the amount paid.

Key Issues

1. Whether the allegations leveled against the applicant constitute an offense under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, or if the dispute is purely civil in nature, as argued by the applicant. 2. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, considering the nature of allegations, his detention period, lack of criminal antecedents, and the potential for trial delays due to COVID-19. The applicant's side argued that the complaint does not disclose any criminal offense, particularly under Section 420 of the IPC, and that the matter is a civil dispute. They contended that the ledger shows goods worth Rs. 2,23,22,336/- were supplied, and the complainant received more goods than the amount paid. They also highlighted the applicant's wife's medical condition, his lack of criminal antecedents, and the unlikelihood of tampering or absconding. The State/Non-Applicant opposed the bail application. The objector's counsel also vehemently opposed the bail, pointing to a Rs. 5 lakh deposit into the objector's account from the applicant's mother and referencing Annexure-A showing Rs. 1,05,68,529/- as a debit balance in the complainant's ledger.