2021 (1) TMI 1203 - DSC - GST

Seeking grant of bail - fradulent availment of ITC - possibility of tampering the prosecution evidence - HELD THAT - This court observes that the offence is triable by the Magistrate and trial will take long time. Further as per section 132 (2) of CGST Act. the maximum punishament is five years and the allegation against the applicant is yet to be established during the trial and trial will take long time. Further the object of the is secure the presence of the accused before the trial. Thus seeing the quantum of sentence accused is likely to face gravity of the offence the liberty of an individual being involved the period of custody of the accused this court is of the considered opinion that the applicant / accused is entitled for concession of regular bail in this case. The applicant namely Shri Nimish Niranjan Siria is ordered to be released - Application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Regular bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

Analysis:
1. Arrest and Allegations: The applicant was arrested on 24/12/2020 for fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) and sent to Judicial Custody. The allegations involved a significant amount and were based on documentary evidence.

2. Arguments of Applicant's Counsel: The counsel argued that the applicant was innocent, falsely implicated, and that no offense was made out against the accused. It was highlighted that the offenses were triable by a Judicial Magistrate, with a maximum punishment of five years, and the case was primarily based on documentary evidence.

3. Opposition by Special Public Prosecutor: The Special Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application, citing the seriousness of the offense, the possibility of tampering with evidence, and the impact on the country's economy. Reference was made to various judgments to support the opposition.

4. Judicial Consideration: The court considered the arguments, the nature of the offense, the quantum of sentence, and the objective of securing the accused's presence before trial. It was noted that bail is the rule and jail committal an exception, as per established legal principles.

5. Decision and Order: After thorough consideration, the court granted the regular bail application. The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with specific conditions, including not tampering with evidence, regularly appearing before the trial court, and not leaving India without permission.

6. Legal Precedents: The court referred to various judgments, including the principle that bail is the rule and refusal is a restriction on the individual's personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The court distinguished the cited judgments from the current case's facts and circumstances.

7. Final Order: The court allowed the bail application, emphasizing the entitlement of the accused to concession of regular bail considering the gravity of the offense, the individual's liberty, and the time the trial might take. The order specified the amount of the bond, conditions of release, and the importance of complying with the set conditions.