2023 (3) TMI 270 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of Regular Bail - availment of fraudulent input tax credit - HELD THAT - Reliance placed in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI 2011 (11) TMI 537 - SUPREME COURT , wherein it was held that we cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigating agency has already completed investigation and the charge sheet is already filed before the Special Judge, CBI, New Delhi. Therefore, their presence in the custody may not be necessary for further investigation. We are of the view that the appellants are entitled to the grant of bail pending trial on stringent conditions in order to ally the apprehension expressed by CBI. Keeping in view the facts of present case and the judgment in the case of Sanjay Chandra and in particular that the petitioner is in custody since 07.05.2022; challan was presented on 06.07.2022, however, charges are yet to be framed; in all there are 20 witnesses; the trial is likely to take a considerable time, his further detention behind bars would not serve any useful purpose, thus the present petition for grant of regular bail deserves to be allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned and subject to him not being required in any other case, and subject to the conditions imposed - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving Sections 132(i) (c) & (e) of CGST Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in relation to a complaint under Sections 132(i) (c) & (e) of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner had been in custody since a specified date, and the offense alleged carried a potential sentence of 5 years. The firm's existence at an additional business location was noted during visits, with a pending framing of charges and 20 witnesses in the case. The respondent opposed bail, citing fraudulent input tax credit and non-cooperation of other firm proprietors. The investigating agency had completed its inquiry, and the charge sheet was filed, indicating no further need for custody during investigation.

The court referred to a Supreme Court judgment in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, emphasizing that accused in economic offenses may be granted bail pending trial under stringent conditions when investigation is complete. Considering the circumstances, including the petitioner's prolonged custody, pending charge framing, and the lengthy trial process expected, the court deemed continued detention unnecessary and granted regular bail.

The court ordered the petitioner's release on bail upon furnishing necessary bonds and complying with specified conditions. These conditions included not tampering with evidence, surrendering the passport, informing authorities of any change in residence, refraining from pressurizing witnesses, and committing similar offenses. Any violation would result in bail cancellation. The trial court was authorized to impose additional conditions as deemed fit, with a reminder that observations made were for the bail petition's adjudication and not a final opinion on the case's merits.

In conclusion, the court allowed the petition for regular bail, emphasizing the need for stringent conditions to ensure the petitioner's compliance and prevent misuse of liberty. The judgment highlighted the importance of balancing individual rights with the seriousness of economic offenses, following legal precedents to grant bail in such cases post-investigation completion.