Facts of the Case

Shishant Mittal sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR alleging offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, filed by Sanjay Agarwal on behalf of his wife Seema Agarwal, proprietor of a GST-registered firm, Gagan Infosys, which provided pine perks e-card services for utility payments and gift purchases. The complaint alleged a card worth Rs. 20 lakh was provided to the petitioner, of which he used Rs. 3,98,000 for utility services and misappropriated the remaining amount for personal expenses without returning it. The Court had earlier granted interim protection, referred the matter to mediation, and on multiple occasions (05.01.2023 and 27.07.2023) accepted the petitioner's assurances to pay the disputed amount in tranches — assurances he repeatedly failed to honour.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether anticipatory bail should be granted, given the petitioner's repeated failure to honour settlement commitments made before the Court, and the seriousness of the cheating allegations.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The dispute was essentially of a civil nature, and the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail, notwithstanding his inability to make the promised payments due to personal difficulties.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The petitioner had knowingly and intentionally cheated the complainant, causing huge financial loss, and had misused the interim protection granted by making false assurances to the Court on multiple occasions without ever honouring them.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court found, prima facie, that the petitioner had intentionally cheated the complainant and had misused the interim protection granted to him by repeatedly making false assurances to settle the dispute.
  • Given the seriousness of the accusations and the large amount due to be recovered, the Court held that custodial interrogation may be required to unearth the modus operandi.
  • The anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC was rejected.

Important Clarification

The complainant's firm's GST registration number is mentioned only as an identifying detail of its business (Gagan Infosys) — there is no GST law issue, evasion allegation, or tax dispute involved in this case at all. The matter is a straightforward cheating/breach-of-trust case turning on the petitioner's conduct and broken settlement promises.

Sections Involved

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 406 and 420
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 (anticipatory bail)

Decision – In Favour of

Decided against the petitioner — the anticipatory bail application was rejected, with the Court finding custodial interrogation necessary.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur
  • Case No.: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10340 of 2022
  • Coram: Justice Kuldeep Mathur
  • Date of Order: 16 August 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.