2021 (9) TMI 1298 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of bail - petitioner is in judicial custody since 23.01.2020 and he has been charge sheeted under section 132(1)(b)(c) and (i) of the Odisha Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - maximum punishment prescribed for the offence - HELD THAT - It is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the Court in seisin of the case with further conditions. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of ₹ 5,00,000/-(rupees five lakhs) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with further conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper - Application disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Case No.02 of 2019-20 of C.T. & G.S.T. Enforcement Unit, Jajpur, for offences under section 132(1)(b)(c) and (i) of Odisha Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Bail Application Rejection:
The petitioner sought bail in connection with a case pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Panposh, Rourkela, under section 132(1)(b)(c) and (i) of the Odisha Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The initial bail application before the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Rourkela was rejected on 16.03.2021, leading to this subsequent application under section 439 of Cr.P.C.

2. Petitioner's Submissions:
The petitioner, in judicial custody since 23.01.2020, argued that the maximum punishment for the offence is five years. Comparing his situation to a co-accused who was granted bail earlier, the petitioner requested a favorable consideration for bail. The co-accused's bail order was presented to support this argument.

3. Respondent's Submissions:
The learned Additional Standing Counsel for C.T. & G.S.T. acknowledged the similarity in the situation of the petitioner and the co-accused but suggested an additional condition preventing the petitioner from alienating any property without court permission. He highlighted the ongoing search for an absconding co-accused and the potential discovery of more evidence upon his apprehension.

4. Judicial Decision:
After reviewing the submissions, documents, punishment prescribed for the offence, and the co-accused's bail release, the Court decided to grant bail to the petitioner. The bail amount was set at ?5,00,000 with specific conditions: appearance on all court dates, non-tampering with prosecution evidence, surrendering the passport, obtaining permission before leaving the state, and not alienating any property without court approval. Any violation would lead to bail cancellation.

5. Conclusion:
The bail application was disposed of, and the petitioner was granted bail upon furnishing the required bond and sureties. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the specified conditions, warning that any breach would result in bail cancellation. An urgent certified copy of the order was to be provided upon application.