2022 (9) TMI 1458 - HC - GST

Rejection of fourth bail application - Out of 12 witnesses, only 7 witnesses have been examined till date - offence under Section 132(1)(b) (c) read with Section 132(1)(i) and Sub-Section (5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Admittedly, the matter is at pre charge evidence and out of 12 witnesses, only 7 witnesses have been examined in pre charge evidence. It is true that after rejection of the fourth bail application wherein also the direction was given to the Trial Court to expedite the disposal of the case, the Trial Court has recorded the statement of the witnesses and six witnesses have been examined in the last four months. The Apex Court in Lalit Goyal vs. Union of India Anr. 2022 (8) TMI 1319 - SC ORDER , which was a matter where the allegations against the accused was with regard of claim of input tax credit to the tune of Rs. 18.91 crores and accused had remained in custody for a period of one year and six months, directed the Trial Court to conclude the trial within six months - In the present case, the allegation pertains to an amount of about Rs. 47 crores and the custody period is one year and eight months, it is therefore not deemed proper to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. Bail application dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

Analysis:
1. The applicant filed a fifth bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. regarding a complaint filed for offenses under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. The applicant's counsel argued that the maximum sentence for the offense is five years, and the matter is still at the pre-charge evidence stage with only 7 out of 12 witnesses examined.
3. The Union of India opposed the bail application, highlighting that the fourth bail application was already dismissed, and six witnesses have been examined by the Trial Court since then.
4. The Union of India relied on a previous case, "Lalit Goyal vs. Union of India & Anr.," where the Apex Court directed the Trial Court to conclude the trial expeditiously.
5. Considering the arguments, the Court referred to the previous case of "Lalit Goyal vs. Union of India & Anr.," where the accused had remained in custody for a year and six months, and the Trial Court was directed to conclude the trial within six months.
6. Despite the progress in witness examination after the fourth bail application's rejection, the Court noted that the trial was still at the pre-charge evidence stage.
7. Given the seriousness of the allegations involving a significant amount and the duration of custody, the Court deemed it inappropriate to grant bail in this case.
8. The fifth bail application was dismissed, but the Court directed the Trial Court to conclude the trial within six months, even if it requires fixing dates day-to-day for the proceedings to expedite.