Bishal Rajdev @ Vishal Rajdeo v. State of Jharkhand
2025-03-04
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
body2025
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard the parties. 2. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Chowka P.S. Case No.57 of 2022 instituted under sections 409, 418, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the I.P.C, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners being the employee of Anil Goel who is the owner of Lucky Coke Groups, in criminal conspiracy with the co- accused persons committed criminal breach of trust, causing huge amount of loss to the informant and fabricated ledger account by making false entry in the register and did not pay Rs.4 crores approximately and the quality of LAM Coke supplied by the petitioners will not be up to the mark. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are false. It is submitted that petitioners are neither the partner nor the director of Lucky Coke Groups. It is then submitted that petitioners have no role to play in the fight between the informant and Anil Goel- the owner of the Lucky Coke Groups. It is submitted that a series of litigation is going between Anil Goel and Hemant Goel- the informant and the dispute relates to commercial transaction between the parties. It is submitted that there is no allegation of entrustment of any property to the petitioners and in absence of that, the offence punishable under Section 406 of the I.P.C. is not made out. It is further submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner of creating any false document. It is then submitted that the informant filed Commercial Suit Nos. 180/2021, 182/2021 and 183 of 2021 contending that there was an agreement for conversion and all the transactions/purchase orders/execution have been made at their office at Kolkata and the jurisdiction of filing of the suit was made at Kolkata, though the informant obtained injunction order in his favour; but upon the petitioners appearing therein in the Calcutta High Court and Calcutta High Court vacated the injunction orders, mentioning that ad-interim ex-parte order was obtained on suppression of material facts and that the informant- who was the plaintiff in Calcutta High Court, did not come with clean hands.
Drawing attention of the Court towards the copy of the order-sheets, which has been kept at Annexures-6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, it is submitted that, there is inordinate delay of lodging of the F.I.R. It is also submitted that the petitioners undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to co-operate with the investigation of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chandil in connection with Chowka P.S. Case No.57 of 2022 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile numbers and photocopy of the Aadhar Cards with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case and they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.