2020 (12) TMI 1164 - HC - GST

Grant of Regular Bail - illegal and wrongful availment of input tax credit - Revenue submits that the amount illegally availed is huge running into more than ₹ 9.00 crores - HELD THAT - Perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, 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 on executing a personal bond of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions - Application allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the offence under Sections 132(1)(c) and (d) of Gujarat GST Act, 2017 - Nature and gravity of the offence - Consideration for bail based on facts, allegations, and role attributed to the accused - Conditions for granting bail.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in connection with a case involving offences under Sections 132(1)(c) and (d) of the Gujarat GST Act, 2017. The applicant, represented by learned counsel, submitted that there was no criminal antecedence and that the complaint by the GST Department only alleged wrongful availing of input tax credit, which could be rectified without criminal liability. The respondent, represented by the learned APP, opposed bail citing the substantial amount involved, exceeding ?9.00 crores, and the gravity of the offence.

The High Court, after hearing arguments from both sides and considering the material on record, decided to grant bail to the applicant. The Court emphasized that without delving into detailed evidence, it found the case suitable for exercising discretion in favor of granting regular bail. The decision was based on a holistic assessment of the facts, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, and the role attributed to the accused. The Court also referenced the legal precedent set by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, [2012] 1 SCC 40, in arriving at its decision.

The Court imposed specific conditions for the grant of bail, including executing a personal bond of ?10,000 with one surety, surrendering the passport, marking presence at the Police Station monthly, providing the current address to the Investigating Officer and the Court, and not leaving India without permission. Additionally, the applicant was directed not to misuse liberty, act against the prosecution's interest, or change residence without prior permission. Breach of these conditions empowered the Sessions Judge to take appropriate action.

Furthermore, the Court clarified that its observations in the bail order should not influence the Trial Court during the trial proceedings. The Rule was made absolute to the specified extent, with directions for communication to the concerned court via email. The judgment underscores the careful consideration of various factors in deciding on bail applications, balancing the interests of justice with the rights of the accused.