2023 (6) TMI 138 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of anticipatory bail - alleged nonpayment of dues - forged bill indicating the purchase of the recovered clothes - HELD THAT - From the perusal of the case diaries and the investigation, so far taken place, it is apparent that accused Harsh Garg and Sarvesh alias Vinod purchased the goods from the complainants named in the various FIRs and after constituting the fake firm induced the complainants to sold their goods and later on fled away from the place of business, switched off their mobiles and in conspiracy with the present petitioners misappropriated the goods received from complainant and illegally sold it in the market. The investigation also reveals that the accused-petitioners submitted a forged bill showing the purchase of the recovered clothes indicating a fake Firm viz. Vandana Fabrics and also illegally supplied the goods in the market. Thus, causing loss to the complainants in tune of approximately rupees three crores. It is further to notice that the so called documents submitted by the accused-petitioners, stating the purchase of clothes, were found to be forged and fabricated as the GST number, name of the Firm and other details were non existing. The investigation further demonstrates that accused-petitioners were constantly in touch with main accused Harsh Garg and Sarvesh alias Vinod through calls indicating their active role in commission of the crime and deceiving the complainants by extracting money in tune to rupees three crores. The narration itself is adequate and demonstrates that the accused persons were hand in glove with each other to squeez the money from the complainants. It is also pertinent to note that an investigation against the accused persons is still pending and, therefore, custodial investigation may further lead to recovery and disclosure of facts for the allegedly misappropriated goods. The petitioners have so far evaded the custodial investigation by filing the criminal misc. petitions under Sections 482 Cr.P.C., which resultantly culminated in its dismissal and a further effort to escape from the arrest through the present bail applications, also miserably errs - this Court is not inclined to grant the anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioners. Bail application dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves multiple bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners apprehending arrest in connection with various FIRs for offenses under Sections 406 & 420 IPC.

Details of the Judgment:

1. Alleged Civil Nature of the Crime:
The petitioners argued that they are consumers only and not directly involved in the alleged crimes, which they claim are of a civil nature related to nonpayment of dues rather than cheating. They contended that they have been falsely implicated in the FIRs by different complainants.

2. Fabricated Documents and Fraud Allegations:
The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail applications, asserting that documents submitted by the accused-petitioners were found to be fabricated. It was alleged that the accused-petitioners, along with other accused individuals, duped complainants by purchasing goods and then illegally selling them in the market, causing a loss of approximately three crores.

3. Active Role in the Crime:
The investigation revealed that the accused-petitioners were in constant touch with the main accused individuals, indicating their active involvement in the crime. The accused were accused of deceiving complainants and extracting money from them.

4. Custodial Investigation and Bail Denial:
The Court noted that custodial investigation may lead to further recovery and disclosure of facts regarding the misappropriated goods. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court denied anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioners, who had previously evaded custodial investigation through legal maneuvers.

Conclusion:
The High Court dismissed the bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by the accused-petitioners Sheetal and Padam, based on the overall facts and circumstances of the case.