Shashi Agarwal vs State Of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case  No.2227 of 2021, for offence registered  under sections 409/120B/34 of IPC, pending in court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Jamshedpur.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the complaint case has been lodged in the capacity of authorized representative of 277  workers of  the  Incab  Industries  Limited  which  is  in  absence  of any power of attorney of any employee of the said Incab Industries Limited. He also submits that the learned court at Jamshedpur  is not having jurisdiction to try the present complaint and the complaint petition does not show that any part of the cause of action  has  arisen  within  the  territorial  jurisdiction  of  that  court.  He next submits that Incab Industries Limited is an industrial unit and it preferred a reference before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) in October, 1999 and the BIFR has declared it to be a sick industrial unit and the order of the BIFR and the learned appellate authority has been questioned in the writ petition being  W.P.(C)  No.5010  of  2011  in  Delhi  High  Court  and  the same was rejected by the order dated 06.01.2016 and the Delhi High Court has not interfered with the orders of the BIFR and the appellate authority. He next submits that the matter has also travelled  up  to  National  Company  Law  Tribunal  (NCLT)  Kolkata  and by  the  order  dated  07.08.2019  the  said  Tribunal  has  appointed  the petitioner as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and the allegations are made that the then Director of the said company has sold some of the assets of the company.

Learned State counsel submits that the matter has arisen out of the complaint case and the allegations are made of selling of certain assets of the said company in the year 2018.

In the aforesaid background, it transpires that the petitioner  happened  to  be  an  Interim  Resolution  Professional  (IRP) and he was appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata by the order dated 07.08.2019. In the representative capacity, the complaint has been filed by one person representing 277 workers of the said company(M/s Incab Industries Limited)/ an industrial unit, and the said company has already been declared insolvent, and in light of the above and considering the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, such averments have also been made in several paragraphs of the anticipatory bail application, and in the attending facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly,  petitioner,  above  named,  is  hereby  directed  to surrender before learned court within four weeks from today, and in event of his surrender/arrest, petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty  Five  Thousand),  with  two  sureties  of  like  amount  each,  to satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Jamshedpur, in connection  with  Complaint  Case No.2227  of  2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.