Anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is granted balancing personal liberty with the nature of accusations, emphasizing evidence and the applicant's cooperation with authorities.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

BAIL APPLN. 3250/2021

1. Present application has been moved under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 134/2022 lodged at PS Daryaganj under Sections 420/406 IPC.

2. The petitioner was granted interim protection dated 8th April, 2022 on payment of Rs.15,00,000/- to the complainant company within a period of one week. The matter was also referred to mediation and an order was passed stating that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. However, the mediation could not materialize.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact it was only a commercial transaction which turned bad. It has been submitted that there is no criminality in the case. Petitioner has been joining the investigation and therefore, the anticipatory bail may be granted.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant states that it was not a commercial transaction. The petitioner had issued a cheque of around Rs.70,00,000/- from an account which had already been closed. Learned counsel submits that it is a case of cheating.

5. Learned APP further states that though the petitioner had joined the investigation but he has not been satisfactorily reply.

6. The facts in brief are that the complainant who is in the business of publishing and distributing the advanced level engineering books filed a complaint against the petitioner Manoj Kumar alleging therein that he is in business with the petitioner since 2010 for publishing and distributing of books. The complainant alleged that initially accused used to clear small bills and gained confidence of the complainant. However, in the year 2017 the petitioner defaulted in making the payments. The matter was referred to the mediation and petitioner promised to clear the bills without default. In view of the conduct of the petitioner, the complainant stopped the credit account. The credit account was re-opened in September 2019 on the request of the petitioner and the petitioner purchased reference books from the complainant from September 2019 to October, 2021. The complainant apprehending that the petitioner may not make the payment again stopped the supply. After persuasion, petitioner issued 12 Post dated cheques of Rs.5,00,000/- each drawn on Yes Bank in favour of the complainant company. The petitioner also issued afresh cheque of Rs.70,04,034/- dated 6th March, 2021 to the complainant against the previous invoices. The cheque was dishonoured with the remark "account closed"

7. During inquiry, it was found that the petitioner has issued the cheque on 6th March, 2021 while his account was closed on 18th February, 2021. It was also found that in the bank statement of the account that petitioner had never balance of Rs.70,00,000/- in his bank account from January, 2021 to 18th February, 2021. Though, initially the petitioner did not join the investigation. However, subsequently, on the service of notice under Section 41 (1) A Cr. PC, the petitioner joined the investigation on 6th September, 2022. The gist of the present case is that the petitioner issued a cheque from the account which was already closed and he never had balance in his bank account.

8. During the course of the submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would further pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the complainant company within four weeks.

9. It is relevant to note that the petitioner has not misused the interim protection granted to him by this court.

10. The criterias for granting the bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. are quite well defined. The first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the accused. Thereafter, inter alia, following factors should be looked into:

(i) the nature and gravity of the accusation;

(ii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and

(iii) whether the accusation has been made with the obje