Anticipatory Bail should be granted in case of serious economic offences

[CA Bimal Jain]

The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of HITENDRA CHANDRAKANT SHAH VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT [2023 (12) TMI 1194 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] dismissed the petition filed by the accused seeking anticipatory bail, in case of serious economic offence, wherein there is a wide negative impact on society.

Facts:

Hitendra Chandrakant Shah (“the Petitioner”), being one of the Accused filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code (“Cr.P.C.”). It was alleged by the State (“the Respondent”) that the Petitioner in collusion with other accused, for availing the financial benefit opened a fake GST Account, based on false and fabricated documents to obtain Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) illegally.

The Petitioner contended that, during the alleged period of committing offences, the Petitioner was in custody for some other offence and was later released on regular bail. Also, to harass the Petitioner, after receiving information from the GST officer, the Police had filed the FIR in question.

Being aggrieved, the Petitioner filed anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

Issue:

Whether Anticipatory Bail should be granted in case of serious economic offences?

Held:

The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of HITENDRA CHANDRAKANT SHAH VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT [2023 (12) TMI 1194 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held as under:

• Relying upon the judgement in the case of NIMMAGADDA PRASAD VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [2013 (5) TMI 920 - SUPREME COURT], noted that, in cases pertaining to economic offences should be dealt differently, as it can lead to huge loss to the economy of state. Also, the Court relied upon the judgment in the case of P. CHIDAMBARAM VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [2019 (9) TMI 286 - SUPREME COURT], wherein it stated that in case of economic offence, having an impact on the society, the Court should be slow in exercising discretion for granting Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
• Opined that, prima-facie a case of serious economic offence has been made out against the Petitioner, having a wide impact on society. No case is made out to for granting the relief of Anticipatory bail to the Petitioner-accused.
• Held that, the petition is dismissed.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])

Discussions to this article

[Sumit Srivastava]

The caption to the article egged me to read the same.

However, the judgment is exactly opposite to what the headline states.

I request Shri Bimal saab to ensure that the title is proof read too before it is published.

I am certain that he is not to be blamed but the person who created this caption to attract more eyeballs.

TMI Chief is Requested to add the word "NO" in bold to the title.

Thanks.