Tej Pal Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh

As both these applications arise out of the same crime number, i.e. Crime No. 447/2023 registered at P.S.- D.D. Nagar, Raipur District Raipur (CG), they are being heard analogously are being decided by this common order.

These are is the first bail applications filed by the applicants under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for grant of anticipatory bail, who have apprehension of being arrested in connection with Crime No. 447/2023, registered at Police Station–D.D. Nagar, Raipur District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 409,420,34 of the IPC.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Rupendra Nirmalkar lodged a written complainant before Police Station against the applicants stating that applicants Chandrashekar and Tejpal Singh are involved in the business of sale and purchase of second hand vehicles in the name of Car Hub. It is alleged that about 4-5 years ago co-accused Chandrashekhar Singh met complainant by saying that he would finance the second hand vehicles at their dealership as he didn't have a dealership. It is also alleged that complainant Rupendra Nirmalkar used to transfer the amount on the same day or the other day in the Axix Bank account of accused persons through RTGS which he received by sale, purchase and re-finance of vehicles. It is alleged that in the month of March, Directors of Car Hub Chandrashekar and Tejpal Singh who have financed and refinanced the old vehicles neither foreclosed nor obtained NOC from the concerned customers or clearance from RTO, have financed total 09 vehicles amounting to Rs. 71,18,000/- from different Finance Companies, namely Cholamandalam Finance Company, A.U. small finance company and S.K. Finance and instead of depositing the said amount to finance companies, kept the same in their own accounts with an intention to cheat the company as well as customers for the purpose of earning illegal profits, breached the criminal trust and by switching off their mobile phones are absconding thus they have committed the offence. It is also the case of the prosecution that when complainant has requested them to give NOC for transfer of the name and other relevant documents they have made lame excuses and thus committed the offence.

In MCRCA No. 1325 of 2023

Learned Sr. counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. She would further submit that applicant Tejpal Singh is a young boy of 22 years and he works as an agent in different insurance companies and in connection with his work the applicant used to visit R.S. Motors and Car Hub for providing insurance to different customers or the companies. She would further submit that the applicant is not an employee of Car Hub and he was neither given any appointment letter nor he received any salary from them. Learned Sr. counsel for the applicant would further submit that the applicant has not received any money from the account of the company. Learned Sr. counsel for the applicant would further submit that the applicant is a heart patient since his childhood and has undergone an heart operation at the age of 14, thereafter he is regularly under the consultation of the Doctors and requires medical Assistance for his better life. Learned Sr. counsel for the applicant would submit that there is delay of 3 months in lodging the FIR as the date of incident had happened from 07.03.2023 to 18.07.2023 and the information was given at Police Station was on 03.10.2023 and no sufficient reason was explained by him in lodging belated FIR. She would further submit that from reading the contents of FIR , it is clear that it is purely a civil dispute and the complainant has tried to be given a colour of criminal dispute and would pray for allowing of anticipatory bail.

In MCRCA No. 1404 of 2023

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that ingredients of offence under Section 409 and 420 of I.P.C. are not attracted against the present applicant and the allegation of cheating made in the FIR is an abuse of process of law. He would further submit that from bare perusal of contents of FIR, it is clear that the allegation levelled against the applicant is purely a contractual dispute which cannot be decided by lodging FIR and just to harass the applicant, complainant lodged false case. He would further submit that there is delay of 3 months in lodging the FIR as the incident happened from 07.03.2023 to 18.07.2023 and the information was given to Police on 03.10.2023 and no proper reason was explained by the complainant in lodging delay FIR. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that neither finance companies nor the customers have made any complaint against him merely on the basis of business rivalry, instant FIR has been lodged against the applicant. He would further submit that the work of foreclosure is not attributable on the part of the applicant, hence lodging of FIR by the complainant is merely based upon cock and bull story. He would further submit that the applicant obtained valid license from the Municipal Corporation, Raipur on 15.12.22 and thereafter he was carrying out several separate transactions in respect to old cars therefore the complainant was not happy with the said act of the applicant, thus to take revenge the complainant has lodged the false FIR against him. He would further submit that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarabilt Kaur Vs. State of Punjab and Another Reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 157, has categorically held that a breach of contract does not give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction. Merely on the allegation of failure to keep up promise will not be enough to initiate criminal proceedings and the Criminal Courts are not meant to be used for settling scores or pressurize parties to settle civil and would pray for allowing the anticipatory bail to the applicant.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application and would submit that there is sufficient material against the applicants in the case diary. He would further submit that the offence committed by the applicants is serious in nature, therefore, they are not entitled for anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the complainant would submit that as per order dated 10.014.2024, he has filed the bank statements of nine vehicles in question which clearly shows that the alleged amount has been received from the account of the complainant’s company and the said amount was disbursed to the account of Car Hub. He would further submit that entire documents pertaining to finance of vehicles are with the finance company and neither complainant has received any amount nor is in possession of vehicle mentioned in the FIR and would pray for dismissal of the anticipatory bail.

Counsel for the intervenor/objectors would submit that in pursuance of direction given by this Court on 10.01.2024, they have filed the documents which clearly show that they have disbursed the amount to the complainant for finance of pre-owned vehicle in the name of various customers at the instance of M/s. R.S. Motor. However, the dealer along with the other accused have cheated and misappropriated the fund financed by the company. He would further submit that finance company has made various complaints before the concerned police station but the police has not taken any prompt action against the applicants. They would further submit that the accused along with complainant have committed financial fraud against the finance companies. They would further submit that the accused prepared forged documents in respect of various vehicle for cancellation of hypothecation and got it refinanced interchangeablity among various finance companies. He would further submit that custodial interrogation of the applicants is required to reveal other fraudulent transactions and in this regard he has made various complaints to Police Official and RTO. They would further submit that similar nature of financial fraud was committed in other districts of State also and would pray for dismissal of anticipatory bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the facts of the case and gravity of the offence and the documents annexed with the case, it is clear that the applicants are adopted unique modus operandi for cheating and causing wrongful loss to the finance company who have given them financial assistance for business, considering the material collected by the prosecution and the affidavits submitted by the finance company, prima-facie it is reflected that the finance company have provided finance to the complainant RS Motors, thereafter the complainant has transferred the amount to the account of Chandrasekhar Singh who is applicant in MCRCA No. 1404 of 2023 which is evident from the documents submitted by the complainant, thus praima facie, involvement of the applicant is there, I am not inclined to grant protection under Section 438 CrPC to the applicant.

So far as MCRCA No. 1325 of 2023 is concerned, submission of learned counsel for the applicant Tejpal Singh that he was not involved in the commission of offence cannot be considered at this juncture, as there is sufficient material in the case diary which suggests that he has received the amounts, even otherwise whether he was involved in commission of offence or not is his defence which cannot be considered at this juncture. Considering the prima-facie, involvement of applicant Tejpal Singh in the case, I am not inclined to grant protection under Section 438 CrPC to the applicants.

Accordingly, both the bail applications filed under Section 438 of CrPC are rejected.