In bail order, judge qualifies StayZilla issue a 'civil dispute'
The client-vendor wrangle over unpaid dues that landed StayZilla co-founder Yogendra Vasupal in a 28-day incarceration was a "civil dispute," judge S Baskaran noted in the order granting bail to the start-up entrepreneur.
In the 4-page order accessed by ET, the judge wrote: "Taking into consideration all the above said facts and the rival contentions, it appears to be dispute relating non-compliance of the contractual obligations and as contended by the petitioner, it appears to be a civil dispute."
Sections of the technology start-up ecosystem across the country had expressed outrage over the arrest of Vasupal, and also asserted that law had been twisted to incarcerate Vasupal in what they saw as a civil matter. The Central Crime Branch had filed an FIR under sections 420, 406 and 506(I) that pertain to cases of cheating and criminal intimidation.
In the order, judge S Baskaran had laid one condition-- apart from the one that mandates Vasupal to deposit Rs 40 lakh with the crime account of the court-- that he should report before the police at 10 a.m. every day for two weeks and make himself available for interrogation whenever summoned afterward.
Vasupal, who announced suspension of operations at StayZilla was picked up by the police in Chennai on March 14, day after an FII was filed with the CCP Chennai. Lawyers working with Vasupal had told ET earlier that he had travelled to the city to make arrangements for an Anticipatory bail.
Just around the time of his arrest and after, Vasupal had engaged the online communities with posts that sought to clear the air about financial mismanagement in the company.
The complainant, Jigsaw Advertising and Solutions, had always maintained that the StayZilla episode will not rattle the ecosystem as claimed by some entrepreneurs. Aditya CS, Operations Manager, at Jigsaw, had earlier said: "It would discourage only the dishonest ones among them. In fact this would set a good precedent for them not to cheat their vendors."
In the 4-page order accessed by ET, the judge wrote: "Taking into consideration all the above said facts and the rival contentions, it appears to be dispute relating non-compliance of the contractual obligations and as contended by the petitioner, it appears to be a civil dispute."
Sections of the technology start-up ecosystem across the country had expressed outrage over the arrest of Vasupal, and also asserted that law had been twisted to incarcerate Vasupal in what they saw as a civil matter. The Central Crime Branch had filed an FIR under sections 420, 406 and 506(I) that pertain to cases of cheating and criminal intimidation.
In the order, judge S Baskaran had laid one condition-- apart from the one that mandates Vasupal to deposit Rs 40 lakh with the crime account of the court-- that he should report before the police at 10 a.m. every day for two weeks and make himself available for interrogation whenever summoned afterward.
Vasupal, who announced suspension of operations at StayZilla was picked up by the police in Chennai on March 14, day after an FII was filed with the CCP Chennai. Lawyers working with Vasupal had told ET earlier that he had travelled to the city to make arrangements for an Anticipatory bail.
Just around the time of his arrest and after, Vasupal had engaged the online communities with posts that sought to clear the air about financial mismanagement in the company.
The complainant, Jigsaw Advertising and Solutions, had always maintained that the StayZilla episode will not rattle the ecosystem as claimed by some entrepreneurs. Aditya CS, Operations Manager, at Jigsaw, had earlier said: "It would discourage only the dishonest ones among them. In fact this would set a good precedent for them not to cheat their vendors."
