Punjab-Haryana High Court
Preet Singh vs State Of Haryana on 19 October, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:136507
CRM-M-38808-2024 - 1-
210 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-38808-2024
Date of Reserve:15.10.2024
Date of Decision: 19.10.2024
Preet Singh ...Petitioner
vs.
State of Haryana ...Respondent
Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat
Present : Mr. Vishal Singh Chauhan, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Sheenu Sura, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
for the complainant.
***
N.S.Shekhawat J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of
the B.N.S.S,2023 with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to him in case
FIR No. 207, dated 08.07.2024, under Sections 406, 420 of IPC, registered at
Police Station, Sector 13/17 District Panipat (Annexure P-1).
2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the
statement made by Happy Grover son of Bachan Lal and the same has been
reproduced below:-
"To the SHO, Sector 13-17, Panipat, Subject Matter- Taking
Legal action regarding the application against Preet Singh S/o
Shri Jaswinder Singh, Jaswinder Singh S/o Shri Kripal Singh,
Resident of House No. 29, Sion Park, Modal, Town, Panipat
Regarding transfer of machinery worth Rs. 45,00,000/- and stock
1 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:136507
CRM-M-38808-2024 - 2-
bags worth Rs. 25,80,000/- from the applicant's factory and
threatening to kill and implicating him in a false serious case,
about recovering the applicant's machinery and stock from the
culprits and handing them over to the applicant. Honorable Sir,
The applicant makes the following request that I am Happy
Grover, S/o Shri Bachan Lal, resident of Sector-11, HUDA,
Panipat. I am a law abiding person. That I and my wife Reena
Sidhar are partners in a business in Guru Kripa Enterprises
located at Pod No. 5, Faridpur Road, Box No. 18, Near Toll Plaza,
Panipat. I had started the above firm in December-2021/January-
2013 by renting race number 5, Faridpur Road, box number 78,
near toll plaza, Panipat. 3. That in January, 2021, for business
reasons, I had taken a loan of Rs. 50,00,000/- from Union Bank of
India in the name of my above mentioned work. In 2023, I had
handed over my above mentioned firm along with machinery, stock
and other goods to the culprits to run them. In this regard, a
mutual agreement was written between me and the culprits on
23/01/2024. According to the above mutual agreement, which was
made between me and the convicts that the convicts will be bound
to pay the bank installments related to the loan taken in the name
of the above firm on the 30th of every month and I and the convicts
will share the profits earned from the above firm. There will be 12
shares. According to the said mutual agreement, it was also
decided between us that the culprits will be responsible for every
kind of liability related to the said firm. Apart from this, it was also
decided between me and the culprits that the liability of the bank
towards the said firm would have to be cleared by the culprits by
December, 2024. Considering all the terms and conditions of the
said written mutual agreement to be true, I and the accused had
signed the said mutual agreement in the presence of witnesses and
the said mutual agreement was also verified by a notary public.
That the culprits had stopped the installment of the concerned
2 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:136507
CRM-M-38808-2024 - 3-
bank twice in violation of the terms of the mutual agreement
mentioned above. In this regard, I had given a written complaint
against the culprits in Police Station Model Town, Panipat. That
on 28.05.2024 the time will be around 10:00 p.m. When I went to
my factory in the afternoon, I was surprised to see that my
machinery worth Rs. 45,00,000/- and stock worth Rs. 25,00,000/-
were missing from the factory. When I talked to the culprits in this
regard and asked about their machinery and stock, the culprits
first started evasiveness and then they raised their chests and
threatened me that the machinery and stock would be shifted to
some other place. We have done this and we will never let you
know about it and if you make any kind of complaint against us, we
will kill you. Due to the threats given by the culprits, my mental
state had suddenly deteriorated and I was resting at my home the
whole day yesterday. Due to which I was not able to complain
about the said issue at that time. That today on 30/05/2024, I had
come to the District Court, Panipat for some personal work,
during that time the accused Preet Singh along with another
person came to the lawyer premises, District Court, Panipat and
asked me to take legal action. But gave various kinds of threats. I
am under constant threat to my life and property from the culprits.
Honorable Sir, I had already started my above mentioned firm by
taking a loan from the bank and only on the basis of the
assurances given by the culprits in the form of written conditions, I
had given permission to the culprits to run my above mentioned
firm but the culprits did not return the money to the bank on time.
By not paying the installments and stealing the machinery and
stock of my firm, they have caused huge financial, mental and
physical loss to me, for which the culprits deserve punishment.
Therefore, you are requested to intervene in the said matter and
register a case against the culprits under appropriate sections and
take legal action against the culprits and return my machinery
3 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:136507
CRM-M-38808-2024 - 4-
worth Rs. 45,00,000/- and stock worth Rs. 25,00,000/- from the
culprits. Let it be provided. It will be so kind of you. Date:-
30/05/2024 Applicant Happy Grover, S/o Shri Bachan Lal,
resident of Sector-12, HUDA.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even from the
allegations levelled by the complainant in the present case, no case under
Sections 406,420 of IPC is made out against the present petitioner. In fact, both
the parties had entered into an agreement (Annexure P-2), and as per the said
agreement, the complainant had taken a shed of the accused on rent. Even, it
was also agreed that in case of breach of any condition of the agreement, the
parties will be at liberty to avail their civil remedies before the competent Court
of law. Even, it has been falsely alleged that the stock was removed from the
factory as the complainant was not filing the GST with regard to the existence
of stocks in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the law
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of "Deepak Gaba and
others Vs. State of Uttar Pardesh and Anr. (SC) 2023 (3) SCC 423 as
follows,where in the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows:-
21."We are, therefore, of the opinion that the assertions made in
the complaint and the pre-summoning evidence led by
respondent no.-2 complainant fail to establish the conditions
and incidence of the penal liability set out under Sections 405,
420, and 471 of the IPC, as the allegations pertain to alleged
breach of contractual obligations. Pertinently, this Court, in a
number of cases, has noticed attempts made by parties to invoke
jurisdiction of criminal courts, by filing vexatious criminal
complaints by camouflaging allegations which were ex facie
4 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:136507
CRM-M-38808-2024 - 5-
outrageous or pure civil claims. These attempts are not be
entertained and should be dismissed at the threshold. To avoid
prolixity, we would only like to refer to the judgment of this
Court in Thermax Limited and Others v. K.M. Johny (2011) 13
SCC 412, as it refers to earlier case laws in copious detail. In
Thermax Limited and Others (Supra), it was pointed that the
court should be watchful of the difference between civil and
criminal wrongs, though there can be situations where the
allegations may constitute both civil and criminal wrongs. The
court must cautiously examine the facts to ascertain whether
they only constitute a civil wrong, as the ingredients of criminal
wrong are missing. A conscious application of the said aspects
is required by the Magistrate, as a summoning order has grave
consequences of setting criminal proceedings in motion. Even
though at the stage of issuing process to the accused the
Magistrate is not required to record detailed reasons, there
should be adequate evidence on record to set the criminal
proceedings into motion. The requirement of Section 204 of the
Code is that the Magistrate should carefully scrutinize the
evidence brought on record. He/she may even put questions to
complainant and his/her witnesses when examined under Section
200 of the Code to elicit answers to find out the truth about the
allegations. Only upon being satisfied that there is sufficient
ground for summoning the accused to stand the trial, summons
should be issued. [17] Summoning order is to be passed when
the complainant discloses the offence, and when there is
material that supports and constitutes essential ingredients of
the offence. It should not be passed lightly or as a matter of
course. When the violation of law alleged is clearly debatable
and doubtful, either on account of paucity and lack of clarity of
facts, or on application of law to the facts, the Magistrate must
ensure clarification of the ambiguities. Summoning without
5 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:136507
CRM-M-38808-2024 - 6-
appreciation of the legal provisions and their application to the
facts may result in an innocent being summoned to stand the
prosecution/trial. Initiation of prosecution and summoning of
the accused to stand trial, apart from monetary loss, sacrifice of
time, and effort to prepare a defence, also causes humiliation
and disrepute in the society. It results in anxiety of uncertain
times".
4. On the other hand learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel
for the complainant have vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned
counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the complainant and his wife were
running a factory in the name and style of M/s Gurukirpa Enterprises, Panipat.
The accused had also become partners in the firm and they had taken away
machinery worth Rs.45 lacs and goods worth Rs.25 lacs from the factory. Even
they entered into a settlement that the complainant party to return the machinery
as well as goods, but still did not return the same to the complainant party.
Thus, the recovery of machinery as well as goods is yet to be got effected from
the possession of the petitioner. They further contended that the custodial
interrogation of the petitioner was required and the petition is liable to be
dismissed by this Court.
5. I have heard the rival contentions made by learned counsel for
the parties and perused the record carefully.
6. In the present case, there was already an agreement between the
complainant and the accused and as per the complainant, the accused had
breached the conditions of the said agreement. However, the law is well settled
that every deceitful act is not unlawful, just as not every unlawful act is
6 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:136507
CRM-M-38808-2024 - 7-
deceitful. "Cheating" generally involves a preceding deceitful act that
dishonestly induces a person to deliver any property or any part of valuable
security, prompting the induced person to undertake the said act, which they
would not have done, but for the inducement. In the present case also, the
breach of conditions of the agreement by the accused would constitute the
offence of cheating or not, is a subject matter of trial before the Trial Court and
the same is yet to be adjudicated by the trial Court, during the course of trial.
Even, the parties had commercial transactions between them and the custodial
interrogation of the accused may not be required.
7. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the interim order
dated 12.08.2024 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join the
investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner
shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S.
(N.S.SHEKHAWAT)
19.10.2024 JUDGE
hitesh
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
7 of 7
