2021 (2) TMI 430 - DSC - GST

Grant of Bail - dummy firms - fake ITC - firms formed by accused persons were never found existing at their registered addresses and the documents uploaded in the GST Portal for obtaining registration by accused persons were also fabricated - HELD THAT - The grant of bail depends upon complex of facts and factors considered in the light of golden principles laid down from time to time by the higher Courts, In Dipak Subhash Chandra Mehta Vs, CBI 2013 (6) TMI 105 - SUPREME COURT Hon'ble Apex Court held that the Court granting bail should exercise its discretion in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course. Though at the stage of granting bail, a detailed examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case need not be undertaken, there is need to indicate in such orders reasons for prima facie concluding whey bail was being granted, particularly, where the accused is charged of having committed serious offence. In the given facts, accused persons are languishing in jail since 19.11.2020 and there is substantial change in circumstances as investigation has been completed and the Department has filed complaint. The trial would going to take long time in the given circumstances and in these circumstances, the further incarceration of the accused would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, considering the fact that investigation has been completed and they are no longer required for custodial interrogation, both the accused persons i.e. Naresh Mittal and Chhedi Lal Mittal are hereby accorded bail subject to furnishing PS/SB of ₹ 5,00,000/- each with following conditions 1. That the accused persons shall join the investigation as and when directed by the investigating agency. 2. The accused persons shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses which will be examined by the department during investigation. 3. That accused persons shall not leave the country without the permission of the Court and deposit his passport with the IO within seven days. 4. That accused persons shall not indulge in similar offence in future. 5. That accused persons shall appear before the Court on each and every date of hearing. The application stands disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Bail application for accused persons Naresh Mittal and Chhedi Lal Mittal

Nature of Accusation and Severity of Punishment:
The bail application for accused persons Naresh Mittal and Chhedi Lal Mittal was considered by the court. The court highlighted the importance of considering the nature of the accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction. Referring to the golden principles laid down by higher courts, the court emphasized the need for reasons to be provided for granting bail, especially in cases involving serious offenses. The court mentioned that a detailed examination of evidence is not necessary at the bail stage but reasons for granting bail must be indicated.

Factors Considered for Granting Bail:
The court considered various factors while deciding on the bail application. These factors included the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, supporting evidence, apprehension of tampering with evidence or threat to the complainant, and prima facie satisfaction of the court regarding the charges. Additionally, in non-bailable offenses, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice or tampering with prosecution witnesses is also crucial.

Judicial Discretion in Granting Bail:
Citing the case of Anil Mahajan Vs. Commissioner of Customs, the court emphasized that there is no fixed rule or principle governing the exercise of discretion in granting bail. Each case must be assessed based on its unique circumstances, and no single circumstance can determine the grant or refusal of bail. The court highlighted that the exercise of judicial discretion in bail matters depends on a variety of circumstances that collectively influence the decision.

Decision and Conditions for Granting Bail:
After considering the facts of the case, the court granted bail to Naresh Mittal and Chhedi Lal Mittal. The court noted that the accused had been in custody since a specific date and that the investigation had been completed with the filing of a complaint by the Department. Given these circumstances and the fact that further incarceration would serve no useful purpose, bail was granted. The accused were required to furnish a personal bond and surety bond of a specified amount each. Additionally, conditions were imposed, including joining the investigation when directed, refraining from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, surrendering passports, not leaving the country without court permission, abstaining from similar offenses in the future, and appearing in court for all hearings.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the court granted bail to Naresh Mittal and Chhedi Lal Mittal considering the completion of the investigation and the change in circumstances. The decision was based on a thorough assessment of various factors, including the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, likelihood of tampering with evidence, and the need for reasons to be provided for granting bail in serious offense cases. The court exercised judicial discretion in granting bail, emphasizing the unique circumstances of each case.