Manoj Kumar Singh vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court allowed the bail application, directing the applicant's release upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety. The Court considered the seizure of iron without verification, the non-examination of the complainant's account books by the police, and the commercial nature of the dispute. It also took into account the applicant's age, medical condition (heart ailment and pacemaker), detention period, lack of criminal antecedents, and the likelihood that the trial would take time. The Court explicitly stated that it was not commenting on the merits of the case. The applicant was granted bail subject to conditions including not tampering with evidence, not inducing witnesses, not acting prejudicially to a fair trial, appearing on all dates, and not involving himself in similar offenses in the future.

Facts

The applicant, Manoj Kumar Singh, Director of Nampa Steel And Power (India) Pvt. Ltd., was arrested on December 12, 2020, in connection with Crime No. 364/2020 for an alleged offense under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant, Harsh Goyal, alleged that the applicant's company received 15.450 tons of iron steel costing Rs. 7.40 lakh for galvanization work within three days but failed to return the goods or an advance of Rs. 1.50 lakh. The applicant contended that the dispute arose over the payment of GST and remaining job work of approximately Rs. 10 lakh, and that the FIR was lodged due to the complainant's influence. The applicant also claimed that the police seized 17 tons of raw iron bar without a seizure memo and without verifying the complainant's account books. The applicant had returned 67,390 Kgs of iron out of 76,910 Kgs provided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the dispute between the applicant and the complainant is of a civil nature, arising from a commercial transaction involving job work and GST payment, rather than constituting an offense under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. Contentions: Petitioner/Applicant: Argued that the dispute is purely civil, related to GST payment and job work, and not criminal. Relied on previous successful business transactions and the fact that most of the material was returned. Alleged the FIR was lodged due to the complainant's political influence and that police acted improperly by seizing material without proper procedure and verification of account books. The applicant also submitted medical papers indicating a heart ailment. Respondent/State: Opposed the bail application and supported the impugned action.