2022 (3) TMI 1586 - HC - GST

Seeking bail application u/s 439 CrPC - Offence punishable under Sections 132(1)(c),(f),(h) and (1) r/w 132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - In view of the fact that the similarly situated co-accused of this case; Lakshya Agarwal has already been granted bail by this Court in S.B. CRLMB No. 20392/2021 and the allegations against the present petitioner are identical in nature. There is nothing from which the case of the petitioner can be distinguished from the case of Lakshya Agarwal, thus, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Summary

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

Analysis:
1. Issue of Bail Application: The judgment pertains to a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the accused-petitioner who was arrested in connection with a complaint under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The accused-petitioner, Nikunj Singhal, sought bail on the grounds that a false case had been lodged against him, and he had been in custody for a considerable period. The defense argued that since a co-accused, Lakshya Agarwal, in a similar situation had been granted bail by the court, there was no justification to keep the petitioner detained.

2. Arguments Presented: The counsel for the accused-petitioner contended that the petitioner had been unjustly incarcerated, emphasizing the release of a co-accused on bail, indicating a lack of differentiation between the cases. Conversely, the Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

3. Judicial Decision: After hearing the arguments and examining the available evidence, the court noted that a co-accused, Lakshya Agarwal, in a comparable case had already been granted bail by the court. The court found the allegations against the present petitioner to be identical in nature to those against the co-accused, Lakshya Agarwal. Consequently, the court deemed it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner. The court ordered the accused-petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Judge for his appearance during the proceedings.

This judgment highlights the application of legal principles in granting bail, emphasizing the importance of consistency in decisions concerning co-accused individuals. The court's decision was influenced by the precedent set in a similar case, underscoring the need for equitable treatment in matters of bail applications.