2021 (3) TMI 862 - DSC - GST

Grant of Regular Bail - Availment of fraudulent ITC through various bogus firms - HELD THAT - No apprehension of tampering with evidence is shown, evidence primarily are documentary. In these circumstances, when other co-accused already been enlarged on bail and accused has already joined the investigation, he already remained in custody for a period of around one month and keeping in view the recent surge in the Covid-19 cases, no purpose would be served to send the accused behind bar. In these circumstances, accused is admittedly on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹ 2 lacs alongwith one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Ld.MM/Duty MM concerned subject to the conditions imposed. Application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Regular bail application, Grounds for bail, Parity with co-accused, Role of accused, Investigation compliance, Family responsibilities, Covid-19 surge, Conditions of bail.

The judgment delivered by the District/Sessions Court at Patiala House Court pertains to a regular bail application filed by the accused, who was on interim bail due to his father's illness. The accused's father had passed away, and the interim bail was extended based on directions from the Supreme Court and High Court. The defense counsel argued for regular bail on grounds of parity, citing that co-accused had been granted bail. However, the CGST counsel opposed, highlighting the accused's alleged involvement in availing fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to ?12 crores through bogus firms, distinguishing his role from the co-accused who were suppliers.

The defense counsel contended that the accused was the sole breadwinner of his family and recently became a father, emphasizing his family responsibilities. It was noted that the accused had cooperated with the investigation during the interim bail period, except for one instance. The defense also argued that there was no risk of tampering with evidence as the evidence was primarily documentary. Considering these factors, along with the surge in Covid-19 cases, the court found no purpose in sending the accused back to custody. The judgment highlighted that the accused had already spent around a month in custody, and other co-accused had been granted bail. Consequently, the court granted the accused regular bail on furnishing a personal bond of ?2 lakhs and one surety, subject to conditions such as joining the investigation when required, surrendering the passport, and not leaving the country without court permission.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the bail application, emphasizing the need for the accused to comply with the specified conditions. The judgment reflected a balanced consideration of the accused's circumstances, family responsibilities, compliance with the investigation, and the prevailing Covid-19 situation, leading to the decision to grant regular bail.