2020 (6) TMI 677 - HC - GST

Grant of Anticipatory Bail - evasion of tax - HELD THAT - Taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, there being no criminal antecedents of the applicant and there being no possibility of his fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case - In the event of arrest of the applicant Shahzad Alam involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report if any under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of ₹ 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned, with conditions imposed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Anticipatory bail application under section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving sections 420, 424, 467, 468, 120B IPC, and section 122/132 U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Factual Background:
The case involves an anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant in relation to Case Crime No. 350 of 2020 under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The applicant is accused of tax evasion and other related offenses in a property rented out to an individual engaged in a generator business.

2. Arguments by Applicant's Counsel:
The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the Trade Tax Officer. It was contended that the allegations of tax evasion are baseless, and the applicant has no criminal history. The counsel emphasized that the applicant would cooperate with the investigation and should be granted anticipatory bail to avoid imminent arrest.

3. Opposition by State Counsel:
The State counsel vehemently opposed the grant of bail, highlighting discrepancies in the 'Kerayanama' submitted by the applicant, suggesting it pertained to a go-down and not the relevant house. The State argued against the applicant's release on bail based on the gravity of the accusations.

4. Court's Decision and Conditions:
The Court, after considering the seriousness of the accusations, lack of criminal antecedents, and the applicant's cooperation assurance, granted anticipatory bail. The applicant was directed to furnish a personal bond and sureties, along with specific conditions. These conditions included making himself available for interrogation, refraining from influencing witnesses, and surrendering his passport if held.

5. Investigation and Compliance Directions:
The Investigating Officer was instructed to expedite the investigation within three months, independently from any observations made during the bail application. The applicant was required to provide a copy of the court order to the concerned police authorities within ten days for compliance verification.

In conclusion, the judgment granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, subject to specific conditions, based on the lack of criminal history, cooperation assurance, and the gravity of the accusations. The Court emphasized the need for expeditious investigation and compliance with the directed conditions.