Denial of Anticipatory Bail in case where GST Number and Firm Name were fabricated

[CA Bimal Jain]

The Hon’ble Supreme court in the matter of SHEETAL MITTAL ETC. VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. ETC.  - 2023 (6) TMI 186 - SC ORDER held that anticipatory bail cannot be granted if a taxpayer fabricates the firm name and GST number and other details were found to be non-existent.

Facts:

Sheetal Mittal and Padam (“the Petitioners”) are engaged in the trade and business at Delhi and received certain goods from the accused Harsh Garg and Sarvesh. The Petitioners contended that the crime in question is purely of civil nature, and it is a case of alleged non-payment of dues and not that of cheating and like offences, so the bail should be granted.

State of Rajasthan and Anr. (“the Respondents”) vehemently and fervently opposed the bail application and submitted that the documents submitted by the accused-petitioners during the course of investigation were found to the fabricated as the GST number, name of the firm and other details were found to be non-existent.

The Respondents further contend that accused petitioners submitted a forged bill indicating the purchase of the recovered clothes, and further the investigation also reveals that accused Harsh Garg and Sarvesh purchased the clothes from the complainants and after inducing them to deliver the goods, supplied the clothes to the petitioners and petitioners illegally sold the same goods in the market, thus accused-petitioners along with accused Harsh Garg and Sarvesh duped the complainants and causing them loss in tune to approximately rupees three crores.

The Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, in this case, held that an investigation against the accused person is still pending, and custodial investigation may further lead to recovery and disclosure of facts for the allegedly misappropriated goods and hence, declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Aggrieved by the decision of the Hon’ble High court, Petitioners seeks Special Leave to Appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Issue:

Whether fabrication of documents can be a cause for the denial of anticipatory bail?

Held:

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in SHEETAL MITTAL ETC. VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. ETC.  - 2023 (6) TMI 186 - SC ORDER held as under:

• Noted that, no case of anticipatory bail is made out looking at the role attributed to the petitioners and the observation made by the High court that the GST number, name of the firm were fabricated, and other details were found to be non-existent.
• Dismissed the Special Leave Petitions.

Relevant Provision:

Section 438 of the CrPC:

“Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest. –

(1) Where any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail; and that Court may, after taking into consideration, inter alia, the following factors, namely:-

(i) ………….……

(ii) ……………..”

(Author can be reached at [email protected])