Criminal liability cannot be imposed in contractual disputes; only clear criminal intent warrants legal action under penal provisions.

ORAL ORDER

Petitioners – accused Nos.3 to 5 in W.P.No.28541/2024 and petitioners – accused Nos.1, 2, 6 and 7 in W.P.No.28555/2024, are before this Court calling in question a solitary crime in Crime No.641/2024, for the offences punishable under Sections 149 , 420, 284, 268 and 506 of the IPC .

2. The complainant in both the petitions remains the same, therefore, the two are taken up together and considered by this common order.

3. Heard Sri. Dhyan Chinnappa, learned senior counsel along with Sri. Sushal Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor representing the State in both the petitions. The complainant, though served in the month of December 2024, has remained unrepresented even today. Therefore, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners and the State are heard.

4. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:

Respondent No.2 is the complainant. The petitioners are the directors and other key managerial personnel of one M/s Ashirvad Pipes Private Limited ('the company' for short). The complainant enters into a transaction with the company for a product supply agreement on 24.09.2022. An advance payment of 50% of the purchase order is made for the supply of 30,000 nos. of the product - Plumber Mitra, prior to entering into the product supply agreement. It is alleged that respondent No.2 had supplied some non-conforming products, which were rejected by the company and sent back to the 2^nd respondent – complainant. The dispute between the two thus gets generated on payment of money, short supply, or wrong supply or otherwise. The parties in terms of the product supply agreement were before the Arbitrator, by filing an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 . A complaint comes to be registered before the jurisdictional police, which becomes a crime in Crime No.641/2024. This Court, owing to the submissions made on 23.10.2024, had passed the following order:

“Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri.Dyan Chinnappa, appearing for the petitioners.

Learned Addl. SPP is directed to accept notice for respondent No.1.

Issue emergent notice to respondent No.2.

The petitioners institute a commercial AA.

No.18/2024 in which the concerned Court passes the following order:

" ORDER

The respondent is hereby restrained by way of an order of temporary injunction from alienating the joint intellectual property of the parties to anybody in any manner as prayed for in IA No.1 till appearance of respondent.

The petitioner shall comply the provisions of Rule 9 of High Court of Karnataka, Arbitration (proceedings before the courts) Rules 2001.

On such compliance, issue ex-parte TI order against the respondent as prayed for in IA No.1.

Issue notice of IA No.1 and Emergent Notice on IA.No.2 along with notice on main petition to the respondent through court and RPAD if PF is paid.

Returnable by 24.08.2024."

The complainant then after the restraint order issues a notice for Arbitration. On 25.07.2024, the complainant issues a notice for Arbitration seeking to appoint an Arbitrator even. After all these proceedings, emerges the impugned crime.

The crime is registered on 21.10.2024 and the SHO records the complaint verbatim as a part of the crime and issues notice on 21.10.2024 under Section 35(3) of the BNSS directing the petitioners to appear.

The way in which the Police have proceeded does not inspire confidence.

The Police have proceeded on war footing to secure the presence of the petitioners at the instance of the complainant, as the complaint itself is copied and pasted to become a part of the FIR.

None of the ingredients of the offences can be considered to be present in the case at hand even to its remotest sense, albeit, prima facie.

Therefore, there shall be an interim order of stay of all further investigation in Crime No.641/2024, qua the petitioners, till the next date of hearing.

Tag this petition along with W.P.No.28555/2024.”

The interim order is in s