Asish Mohapatra Alias Ashish Mohapatra v. State Of Punjab And Another
CRM-M No.66878 of 2025 (O & M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 202/3 ***** CRM-M No.66878 of 2025 (O & M) Date of decision : 12.12.2025 Date of uploading : 12.12.2025 Ashish Mohapatra alias Ashish Mohapatra .............Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rahul Srivastava, Advocate Ms. Safia Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG, Punjab Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sushant Kareer, Advocate, Ms. Keerat Dhillon, Advocate, for respondent no.2 --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent no.2 is taken on record.
2.
Learned State counsel has filed short reply by way of affidavit of Harpal Singh, PPS, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law & Order), Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana in Court today. The same be kept on record. Copy thereof has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner. The averments contained in paragraph no.8 of the reply reads thus:
'8. That at present, a consolidated enquiry is being conducted by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law and order) into all the above-mentioned complaints, namely Complaint Serial No. 1774 Zone-02 dated 26.06.2025, PGD No. 600338/599781 dated 16.06.2025, Complaint Serial No. 2608 Zone-02 dated 15.09.2025, and Complaint Serial No. 2636 Zone-02 dated 15.09.2025, filed by respondent no. 2 Sunil Kumar, vide no. 26/C DCP Law and order Ludhiana ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.12.12 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M No.66878 of 2025 (O & M) -2dated 26.11.2025, who meticulously examined the statement of the applicantrespondent no.2 Sunil Kumar, the applications submitted by him, and all documents annexed thereto. Upon such scrutiny. it has emerged that the applicant's firm Deepak Builders had been purchasing TMT steel bars from the opposite firm OFB Tech in the ordinary course of commercial dealings and, for securing the value of the goods so purchased, had furnished three Bank Guarantees. Out of these, two Bank Guarantees were duly returned by the opposite party after clearance of the corresponding dues. As regards the third Bank Guarantee of Rs. 2 Crores, the material reflects that the same was returned by the opposite party after the applicant deposited the outstanding amount of Rs.
2 Crores, which was stated to include penalties and interest for delayed payments. During the course of enquiry, no cogent, independent or reliable evidence was produced by the applicant to substantiate the allegation that the said payment was made under any threat, coercion, blackmail or unlawful pressure. Rather, the entire set of documents examined, including ledger entries, BG records and commercial correspondence indicates that the matter pertains to mutual monetary transactions arising out of a commercial relationship between two business entities and is purely civil in nature. In the absence of any material disclosing the commission of a cognizable offence, the Inquiry Officer concluded that no criminal action is warranted and that the applicant, if so advised, may seek appropriate civil remedies before the competent court.
Accordingly, the applications were recommended to be consigned to the office of the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, and the same stand seen and filed on dated 03.12.2025.'
3.
Having perused the above reply, learned senior counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition in hand at this stage. 4.
Dismissed as withdrawn, for the nonce.
5.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly.
(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 12.12.2025 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.12.12 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document