2021 (11) TMI 541 - DSC - GST

Seeking grant of Bail - allegation against the accused are that few signed and unsigned documents of the said firms were found in his office - active role in commission of crime under Section 132 of CGST Act - HELD THAT - This court is of considered view that the present accused does not deserves to be released on bail. It is settled preposition of law that economic offences in itself are considered to be gravest offence against the society at large and hence are required to be treated differently in the matter of bail. It seems that the entire community would aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book as such offences affects the very fabric of democratic governance and probity in public life. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the national economy and national interest. This court is of considered view that if accused is released on bail then there are likely chances of him to jump bail - Bail application dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Regular bail application under section 437 Cr.P.C filed by accused Yogender.

Analysis:
1. Facts of the Case:
- The applicant is accused of being involved with fake firms M/s Lalaji Enterprises and M/s Hemu Overseas.
- Applicant denies any connection with the firms and claims to be falsely implicated.
- DGGI confirms no connection between accused and the firms in question.
- Applicant cooperated in the investigation but was still arrested based on alleged planted documents.

2. Allegations by DGGI:
- Accused found in possession of incriminating material related to fake firms during a search.
- Statements reveal involvement in preparing fraudulent documents for passing on fake ITC.
- Accused implicated in offenses under Sec 132(1)(b)&(c) of CGST Act, 2017.
- Accused accused of facilitating fake ITC and using forged documents for fraudulent returns.

3. Arguments:
- Defense argues that accused, as a Chartered Accountant, was just an employee and not involved in retaining benefits from GST offenses.
- Defense asserts that the accused should not be held liable under Section 132 of CGST Act.
- Prosecution argues that accused actively participated in the crimes and should not be granted bail.

4. Court's Decision:
- Economic offenses are considered grave and bail should be treated differently.
- Economic offenders impacting the economy should be brought to book.
- Likelihood of accused jumping bail is a concern.
- Bail application of the accused is dismissed without commenting on the case's merit.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the bail application of accused Yogender Singh, considering the seriousness of economic offenses and the potential risk of the accused fleeing. The judgment highlighted the societal impact of economic crimes and the need to uphold justice without fear of criticism. The decision was based on the principle that economic offenders should be held accountable to maintain trust in the justice system and protect the national economy.