The central legal point established in the judgment is that disputes arising from business transactions may be considered of a civil nature, and compliance with court orders, such as joining the investigation, can influence the grant of anticipatory bail.

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

By way of this petition filed under Section 438 CrPC, petitioners pray for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.466 dated 03.11.2021 registered at Police Station Baldev Nagar, District Ambala, under Sections 406/420/506 IPC.

2. FIR is based on a complaint dated 02.11.2021 made by Shri Pushkar Raj Gulati, proprietor of the firm M/s Gulati Engineers, engaged in the business of trading of mixers and electrical goods. Said complaint was directed against the petitioners, the partners of M/s Electro Max Home Appliances, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing all kinds of mouldings and electrical appliances. It was alleged that in 2018, the complainant-firm had ordered juicers, mixers, grinders etc. from the firm of the accused and had paid total amount of `38,02,000/- during 03.10.2018 to 20.12.2018. Despite receipt of the amount, neither the goods were delivered to the complainant-firm nor was the amount returned. It was further alleged that on 18.10.2021, when the complainant and his son met the petitioners-accused and asked for their money, they were abused and threatened.

3. (i) It is contended by ld. counsel for the petitioners that though the occurrence pertains to the transactions of the period October 2018 to December 2018, but the FIR has been lodged on the basis of complaint dated 02.11.2021 i.e., almost after three years. It is further contended that earlier, a complaint was made on 30.7.2021 addressed to the Home Minister, Haryana on the similar allegation of criminal breach of trust, cheating and criminal intimidation. However, later on, complainant made representation to DSP, Ambala to keep in abeyance the inquiry of the said complaint till 10.10.2021, as parties were trying to reach at a compromise. Copy of the complaint and representation are Annexure P3 and P4, respectively.

(ii) Ld. counsel further contends that a civil dispute has been given the colour of criminal offence. As per the information received by the petitioners through RTI, it transpired that DSP vide its report dated 21.09.2021, submitted to the senior officers, concluded that matter being of civil nature pertaining to business transaction, the complaint deserved to be consigned. Still further, it is contended that present FIR is a counter-blast to the Civil Suit for mandatory injunction as filed by the petitioners on 28.10.2021, which is pending for consideration before the trial Court at Ambala. Copy of the plaint is Annexure P7.

(iii) Apart from above, it is contended that out of Rs.38,02,000/- credited to the account of the petitioners, amount of Rs.21,78,326/- was towards the payment of outstanding dues for the goods earlier supplied to the complainant firm, whereas the remaining amount of Rs.16,23,674/- was the advance payment for purchase of modified mould dye of juicer mixer grinder out of the total payments of Rs.30 lakh. Representation was also made by the petitioners to the Inspector General of Police, Haryana, disclosing all the transactions between the parties.

(iv) Ld. counsel further submits that no penal offence is made out and case is purely of civil nature. Still, as in compliance of the order of this Court, petitioners have already joined the investigation and therefore, the interim anticipatory bail earlier granted to them be made absolute.

4. Opposing the bail petition, ld. State counsel along with ld. senior counsel for the complainant submits that receipt of the amount of Rs.38,02,000/- by the petitioners is admitted. Against that amount of Rs.38,02,000/-, no goods were delivered to the complainant and that a false story has been concocted by the petitioners regarding the outstanding dues of earlier deliveries. Ld. State counsel also submits that though petitioners have joined the investigation but they are not cooperating in the same qua the recovery of the cheated amount. Prayer for rejecting the petition is made.

5. I have considered submissions of both the sides and have appraised the record.

6. Even