9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (12) TMI 1100 - HC - GSTGrant of Conditional bail - Direction to surrender passport before the Trial Court and direction to not to leave India, without prior permission of this Court - HELD THAT - In this case, Nitesh Wadhwani is also one of the accused persons, who has been granted bail by this Court with the same condition and against which, he approached the Apex Court in NITESH WADHWANI VERSUS UNION OF INDIA 2023 (4) TMI 1275 - SC ORDER , the Apex Court has permitted him to leave the country, without requirement of reporting to the Court - Against Nitesh Wadhwani also Adjudication Proceedings are initiated. He is also facing ECIR along with this applicant. Condition No.11 (v) imposed on the applicant by this Court vide order dated 13.08.2020 (Annexure A/1) passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.26653 of 2020 is hereby relaxed - Application disposed off.
Issues involved:
The judgment involves a request for modification of bail conditions u/s 439 (1) (B) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The issues include the imposition of conditions related to surrendering the passport and not leaving India without prior permission, the delay in filing a charge sheet by GST Authorities, initiation of Adjudication Proceedings, registration of ECIR under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, intervention by the Directorate of Enforcement, and the role of the Enforcement Directorate (E.D.) in the case. Imposition of Bail Conditions: The applicant sought modification of Condition No.11 (v) imposed by the Court, which required surrendering the passport and not leaving India without prior permission. The bail was granted in a case registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Indian Penal Code. The applicant argued that the GST Authorities had not filed a charge sheet, making the condition unjustifiable for an indefinite period. Response by the Respondent: The respondent stated that a separate FIR had been registered under IPC against the applicant, as the GST Authorities cannot prosecute under IPC. Additionally, no decision had been made to continue prosecution under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. Adjudication Proceedings had been initiated, but were stayed by the Court. Furthermore, an Enforcement Case Information Report had been filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act against the applicant. Intervention by Directorate of Enforcement: The Directorate of Enforcement sought to oppose the relaxation of bail conditions for the applicant to travel abroad. A Confidential Report was produced indicating the applicant's lack of full cooperation in the proceedings. The E.D. emphasized its powers to impose conditions on an accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Role of Enforcement Directorate (E.D.): The E.D.'s involvement in the case was highlighted, noting that no ECIR was registered against the applicant when bail was granted. The E.D. was asserted to have sufficient authority to impose conditions on an accused and take necessary measures. Judicial Decision and Disposal: The Court relaxed Condition No.11 (v) imposed on the applicant, considering the various aspects of the case and the intervention by the Enforcement Directorate. Consequently, the Miscellaneous Criminal Case was disposed of, along with any pending interlocutory applications.
|
