2019 (9) TMI 875 - HC - GST

Grant of Regular Bail - offences under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Considering the nature of allegations made against the applicant in the FIR and considering the admitted position that the applicant is arrested on 08.07.2019 and the fact that till date even after passage of 60 days, neither any complaint nor charge-sheet is filed and therefore, the applicant would be entitled for default bail, without going into detail at this stage, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with an offence - Application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Regular bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for offences under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017.

In this case, the applicant filed an application seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for offences under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017. The applicant's advocate argued for bail based on the nature of the offence and requested the court to impose suitable conditions. On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor representing the Respondent-State opposed the grant of bail citing the gravity of the offence. The court considered the arguments, perused the investigation papers, and evaluated the allegations and the applicant's role. The court noted that despite the arrest of the applicant, no complaint or charge-sheet was filed even after 60 days, making the applicant eligible for default bail. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion and granted regular bail to the applicant, ordering release upon executing a personal bond and surety. The court imposed various conditions including not misusing liberty, surrendering passport, marking presence periodically, providing address updates, and obtaining permission before leaving the state. The court also empowered the Sessions Judge to take action in case of condition breaches and allowed modifications to the conditions as per the law. The trial court was instructed not to be influenced by the preliminary observations made by the High Court during the bail order. The rule was made absolute to the specified extent, and direct service was permitted.

This judgment primarily dealt with the grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with offences under the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017. The court carefully considered the nature of the allegations, the absence of a charge-sheet despite the passage of 60 days, and the applicant's entitlement to default bail. By analyzing the facts and circumstances, the court exercised its discretion and allowed the application for regular bail, subject to specific conditions to ensure the applicant's compliance and appearance during the trial. The court emphasized the importance of not misusing liberty, surrendering passport, marking regular presence, updating address information, and seeking permission before leaving the state. Additionally, the court empowered the Sessions Judge to take appropriate action in case of any breaches of the imposed conditions, highlighting the significance of adhering to the bail terms. The judgment underscored the need for the trial court to independently assess the evidence during the trial without being influenced by the preliminary observations made by the High Court during the bail hearing, ensuring a fair and impartial trial process.