ASHOK KUMAR SABBARWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

(2.) CONTENTION of the learned Counsel for petitioner is that petitioner was originally running the shops of Bata Shoe Company Bundi on commission basis but subsequently in 2004, it was agreed between the accused -petitioner and complainant -company that petitioner would purchase two shops on payment of total Rs. 15 lacs. Petitioner paid entire amount and the complainant -company assured for getting the documents executed at later point of time. Reference in this connection was made to the receipt given by Ashesh Bhattacharya, District Manager of the Bata Company, another receipt of Rs. 4,30,800/ - given by B. Das Manager Bata Company and lastly the receipt dated 30/6/2009 issued by the Bata Company for payment of Rs. 1,91,225.16 in favour of the petitioner. Reference is also made to the letter wrote by the petitioner to the complainant -Bata Shoe Company dated 21/12/2006 asking them to get the sale -deed registered. It was thereupon that the first information report was lodged by the complainant -company against the petitioner for offence Under Sections 420, 467, 468, 447, 448, 451, 120B and 427 IPC. Learned Counsel submitted that petitioner has also given a notice to the complainant Bata India Ltd., Gurgaon (Haryana) for getting the aforesaid lease -deed executed in his favour or else, he shall have to file suit for specific performance through Advocate. A civil dispute has thus been given the shape of a criminal case.

(3.) HAVING regard to the facts aforesaid and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the accused petitioner on anticipatory bail.