Court emphasizes the civil nature of the dispute, releases accused after 52 days in custody citing lack of criminal intent.
In a significant ruling, the Gauhati High Court has granted bail to Mukesh Jalan, the Proprietor-cum-Director of Sadguru Engineers & Allied Services Private Limited, who had been embroiled in a legal battle over a commercial dispute with allegations of criminal breach of trust, cheating, and criminal intimidation. The case stemmed from a contractual disagreement related to the supply of materials for a 4-Lane Highway Project from Jorhat to Jhanji.
Justice Anjan Moni Kalita, presiding over the case, scrutinized the nature of the allegations and concluded that the dispute was primarily civil, lacking substantial evidence of criminal intent. The court noted that mere breach of contract or inability to pay dues does not constitute criminal offenses unless fraudulent or dishonest intentions are demonstrated at the inception of the transaction.
The court was informed about the background of the dispute, which involved Mukesh Jalan's alleged failure to pay the informant, a vendor supplying construction materials, despite receiving payments from NHIDCL for the project. The informant accused Jalan of misappropriating funds and not clearing dues amounting to Rs. 4.36 crore. The case gained complexity with the involvement of multiple parties and a series of FIRs filed by various vendors against Jalan.
During the hearing, the defense counsel highlighted that the allegations were an attempt to convert a civil dispute into a criminal case, describing it as an abuse of legal processes. The counsel argued that the project was nearly complete, and any delays or payment issues were typical in large-scale projects, lacking any criminal intent.
The prosecution, however, contended that multiple FIRs and the accused's actions indicated an intention to cheat the vendors. They argued for denying bail, citing the ongoing investigation and the financial magnitude involved.
After examining the case diary and various submissions, the court found the investigation to be sluggish, noting that the accused had not been interrogated during his judicial custody. The court expressed concern over the lethargic pace of the investigation, which had not made significant progress even after 52 days.
In its decision, the court emphasized that custodial detention was unwarranted, given the civil nature of the dispute and the lack of evidence pointing to criminality. The court ordered Mukesh Jalan's release on a bail bond of Rs. 2 lakh with conditions ensuring his cooperation with the investigation and preventing any tampering with evidence.
The court's ruling underscores the importance of distinguishing between civil disputes and criminal cases, cautioning against using criminal proceedings as a tool for settling commercial disagreements.
Bottom Line:
A commercial dispute cannot be converted into a criminal case unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is evident at the inception of the transaction. Custodial detention is unwarranted in cases primarily of civil nature with remedies outside criminal proceedings.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 316(5), 318(4), 351(3), Section 483 of BNSS, 2023
Mukesh Jalan v. State of Assam, (Gauhati) : Law Finder Doc id # 2859879
