2021 (5) TMI 227 - DSC - GST

Bail Application of co-accused - fake/inadmissible ITC on the strength of such fake invoices - issuance of goods less invoices - not habitual offenders - admittedly 57 days are already passed since arrest of the applicants/accused persons and as per information received from IO Sudhir, Department is still not in a position to precisely tell as to whether the complaint/charge-sheet would be filed within statutory period of 60 day - HELD THAT - The fact that main accused Kabir Kumar is already released on bail, period of incarceration of both the accused persons coupled with the fact that the Department is still not forthcoming in filing complaint/charge-sheet in this case. Both applicants/accused persons namely Manish and Vikas are admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of each with one surety of like amount, subject to conditions imposed - bail application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Bail application under Section 437 Cr.P.C.

Analysis:
The joint bail application under Section 437 Cr.P.C. was moved on behalf of the applicants/accused persons, Manish and Vikas, who had been in custody for 57 days. The applicants were allegedly working for the main accused, Kabir Kumar, issuing invoices on his directions. The defense argued that there was no concrete evidence linking the applicants to Kabir Kumar, apart from self-incriminatory statements that were retracted. It was highlighted that Kabir Kumar had been released on bail earlier, and the applicants had not been interrogated despite their prolonged custody. The applicants' young age, coupled with family circumstances, were presented as grounds for bail.

The Department strongly opposed bail, alleging that the applicants were key associates of Kabir Kumar in a significant fraud involving the creation of fake firms and issuance of fake invoices, leading to substantial financial implications. Evidence linking the applicants to Kabir Kumar, such as cheque books and debit cards found during a search, was presented. The Department emphasized the gravity of the offenses and the potential threat posed by releasing the applicants on bail.

During the hearing, the Court inquired about the status of filing a complaint/charge-sheet in the case, to which the Department expressed uncertainty about meeting the statutory 60-day deadline. Reference was made to a Delhi High Court order in a similar case where bail was granted due to delays in filing the charge-sheet. The Court highlighted the need to consider various factors, including the nature of the offense, severity of punishment, and likelihood of tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice, when granting bail in serious cases.

Considering the totality of circumstances, including the release of the main accused on bail, the applicants' period of incarceration, delays in filing the charge-sheet, and the ongoing pandemic situation, the Court granted bail to Manish and Vikas. Bail conditions were imposed, including restrictions on leaving India, attending court, refraining from similar offenses, and avoiding tampering with evidence or witnesses. The bail order was subject to the applicants furnishing bail bonds with sureties, with the Court ensuring a smooth virtual hearing process.