Gravity of the offence, object of the Special Act and the period of sentence relevant when granting bail in GST related offences

[CA Bimal Jain]

The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PANKAJ KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB - 2024 (1) TMI 874 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT granted bail to the Accused, thereby holding that, gravity of the offence, object of the Special Act and the period of sentence among other factors have to be taken into consideration while granting bail to the Accused in offences related to GST.

Facts:

Pankaj Kumar (“the Petitioner”) has filed a petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“Cr.P.C.”)  for grant of regular bail to the Petitioner pertaining to complaint case filed under offence punishable under Section 132(1)(a), 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c) and (i) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) wherein it has been alleged that, the Petitioner has issued fake bills by creating paper firms and thereby causing loss to the government exchequer.

Issue:

Whether the gravity of the offence, object of the Special Act and the period of sentence have to be taken into consideration while granting bail to the Accused in offences related to GST?

Held:

The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PANKAJ KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB - 2024 (1) TMI 874 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT held as under:

• Relying upon the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. - 2022 (8) TMI 152 - SUPREME COURT, pertaining to economic offences, the gravity of the offence, object of the Special Act, and the period of sentence among other factors have to be taken into consideration while granting bail to the Accused.
• Noted that, though the economic offenses constitute a separate class of their own. However, the presumption of innocence is a crucial part of the criminal jurisprudence. Also, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has enumerated upon the need to integrate right of investigating agencies to have effective interrogation of the accused with right of liberty of the accused.
• Opined that, relying upon the aforesaid case-law and taking into consideration the incarceration suffered by the Petitioner, the maximum punishment prescribed, and the fact that the investigation has already stands concluded, the present petition is allowed.
• Held that, the Petitioner be ordered to be released on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 

(Author can be reached at [email protected])