JUDGMENT

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

CRL.M.(BAIL) 2099/2025

1. The captioned appeal has been preferred by the appellant seeking to impugn the judgment of conviction dated 25.09.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (PC Act), in SC No. 02/2022, whereby the appellant was held guilty of the charge under Section 409 IPC and acquitted of charges under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC.

2. The present application under Section 430 BNSS (erstwhile Section 389 CrPC) seeks to suspend the order on sentence dated 09.10.2025 whereby the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 years and was further directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- of which Rs. 1,00,000/- was payable to the State and Rs. 4,00,000/- was directed to be paid as compensation to the complainant under Section 357A Cr.P.C and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief, as culled from the record, is that in early 2005 Mr. Aniljeet Singh (hereinafter “complainant”) and Mr. Sumeet Suri (hereinafter “appellant”) were running separate business firms namely, M/s Fashion Wears and M/s Anjanne Clothing Private Limited (hereinafter “ACPL”), respectively. Consequently, on 01.04.2005 the complainant and the appellant joined hands to form another company namely, M/s Ivory Clothing Private Limited (hereinafter “ICPL”).

4. In November 2006, the complainant’s father fell ill and subsequently died, in the year 2008. During this period the appellant was looking after day to day affairs of ICPL. After his father's death, the complainant began managing ICPL’s business and discovered large unpaid dues to unknown creditors and advances to several debtors. The appellant, with the help of his employee Chander Mohan and through his own company ACPL, illegally transferred substantial funds disguised as personal withdrawals and company transfers. When confronted, the appellant offered to settle the matter through an MoU dated 29.08.2008, agreeing to pay Rs.1.30 crore and resign from ICPL.

5. The appellant entered into the aforesaid MoU with mala fide intentions so that his fraud remained undetected. The complainant without comprehending the systemic fraud committed by the appellant, signed the aforesaid MoU and settled the matter therein. However, the complainant hired auditors to look up the books of account of ICPL and received a bolt from the blue with regard to systemic fraud committed by the appellant to siphon off funds to the tune of approximately Rs. 3 crores from ICPL.

6. The charge-sheet was filed on 22.01.2014, followed by four supplementary charge-sheets (2014-2021). Charges under sections 409/420/468/471 IPC were framed against the appellant.

7. To prove its case, the prosecution examined 25 witnesses and after considering the evidences, the learned Special Judge convicted the appellant for dishonestly misappropriating company funds of ICPL to the tune of Rs. 3 crores, thereby constituting criminal breach of trust under section 409 IPC. However, the appellant was acquitted of the charge under sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC.

8. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the captioned appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

9. It is the case of the appellant and so contended by the Mr. N Hariharan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, that the impugned conviction under section 409 IPC is inherently inconsistent and contradictory to acquittal under sections 420/468/471 IPC.

10. He submits that the entire case of the prosecution is predicated upon the allegations of forgery, fake bills, cheating and dishonest inducement and all these allegations were rejected by the learned Trial Court in its impugned judgment dated 25.09.2025. Therefore, once these allegations fail, the charge of criminal breach of trust under section 409 IPC, which is substantially imitative and grounded fundamentally in these allegations, cannot survive.

11. To buttress his