Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010252272024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3144/2024 ARJUN SINGH MEHTA S/O SRI MOHAN SINGH MEHTA A RESIDENT OF 17, KACHHARI WARD, NEAR SDM COURT, LOHAGHAT, CHAMPAWAT, UTTARKHAND-262524 AND THE PRESENT IS ALSO BEING THE DIRECTOR CUM CEO OF AIEZE VERTEX PRIVATE LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SITUATED AT 4TH FLOOR, OFFICE NO. 418, TOWER -4, ASSOTECH BUSINESS CRESTERRA, SECTOR-135, NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDHA NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA, PH. NO. 970733771. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A TEWARI, MR T THAKURIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR D BHARDWAJ (FOR INFORMANT),MR C GARG (FOR INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER 21.02.2025 Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing the petitioner, assisted by Mr. A. Tewari, Advocate. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam and Mr. K. Gogana, learned counsel appearing for the informant. Page No.# 2/3 This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 by the petitioner, namely, Sri Arjun Singh Mehta, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 13/2024. It may be stated that this court earlier granted interim bail to the present petitioner on 17.12.2024 and pursuant to the said interim order, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer. The informant Mr. Sunny Breja represents a company called “ Prontastic IT Services Private Limited”. This company associates with another company named “M/s Aieze Vertex Private Limited”, which is representing by the present petitioner. According to the understanding between them, the company of the present petitioner was to provide video conferencing links to the company of Mr. Sunny Breja. It is alleged in the FIR lodged by Mr. Breja that he came to know that the ‘Adivasi Welfare and Development Council’ at Assam was going to issue large orders. Since the present petitioner was having some business transactions with the State of Assam, the informant Mr. Sunny Breja came in contact with another person named Mr. Amit Jalali, who also had some business interest in Assam. Accordingly, Mr. Sunny Breja came to Assam and met some other persons. He was even taken to the house of a Minister situated within the secretariat compound. Some persons claiming to be the high ranking officers of the State Government, asked Mr. Breja to supply bed-sheets worth Rs.1.2 Crore. It may be mentioned that no work order was given to that effect. But Mr. Breja supplied the bed-sheets worth Rs.1.2 Crore to ‘Adivasi Welfare and Development Corporation Warehouse at Changsari”. The long FIR shows that Mr. Sunny Breja had paid money to different persons including the present petitioner for getting the contract. He projected that the money was paid in order to get his dues cleared. Alleging the criminal act, Mr. Breja claimed that he paid an amount of Rs.80 Lakhs into the bank account of the present petitioner. It may be mentioned that, pursuant to the interim order, aforesaid, the petitioner has already appeared before the Investigating Officer and gave his statement. Today, the learned counsel for the informant has prayed for cancelling the interim order granted to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has allegedly threatened the informant asking him to withdraw the FIR. To that effect, the learned counsel for the informant has even submitted Photostat copies of the some documents. Page No.# 3/3 I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the both sides. Regarding objection to the bail application, this court is of the opinion that filing of an FIR before Police, itself does not establish any case or any allegation and that is why prayer for cancellation of the bail is rejected. On a plain reading of the FIR, it is clear that it was a business transaction between two parties. Some amount of money must have been given to the present petitioner. The FIR says that the said money was given to the present petitioner only as a matter of business transaction. There is no allegation that the present petitioner had cheated and misappropriated the money of the informant Sri Sunny Breja. Because, in the FIR itself, he has claimed that he gave the money to the present petitioner during the course of business transactions. There are some other documents in the case records which shows that the informant company was to pay an amount of Rs.45 Lakhs to the present petitioner for providing video conferencing links. For that matter also, they are vigorously communicating each other. Having heard the learned counsels of both sides and after considering whatever had happened between the parties and whatever allegations brought against the present petitioner, this court is of the opinion that for the aforesaid allegations only, the petitioner does not deserve to be detained in custody. Further, the petitioner has already appeared before the Investigating Officer, pursuant to the interim order granted to him and got his statement recorded and has been cooperating in the investigation. In view of the above, the bail application of the petitioner is allowed. The interim order dated 17.12.2024 passed in favour of the petitioner by this court is made absolute. The bail application is disposed of. Case Diary shall be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant