9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (11) TMI 978 - HC - GSTSeeking grant of anticipatory bail - lower amount of GST paid to Government - manipulation of GST returns - forged challans and returns - HELD THAT - The allegations in the FIR are primarily against Harish Kumar Rampal, who was the Chartered Accountant and it was his duty to file the requisite GST returns and also the fact that the petitioner is only involved in the case as there is a transfer of some amount and also the fact that as per the petitioner, the amount of ₹ 21 lakhs out of the said ₹ 31 lakhs has already been returned to Pooja Sablok and the balance amount of ₹ 10 lakhs has already been deposited with the trial Court, regarding which there is no objection in case the said amount is deposited with the GST Authorities and also the fact that the petitioner has joined the investigation, the present petition for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed and interim order dated 12.08.2021 is made absolute. It is however, clarified that the payment of the amount of ₹ 10 lakhs is without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner as well as the complainant, as by virtue of the said payment, neither the petitioner has admitted her guilt in the matter nor the complainant has fully and finally settled the matter with the petitioner so as to entitle her to file petition for quashing of the FIR solely on the basis of compromise. Application disposed off.
Issues: Application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for impleading applicant/complainant as party in the case, First petition for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving allegations of fraud and cheating under IPC.
Issue 1: Application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for impleading applicant/complainant as a party in the case. In this case, an application was made under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) for impleading the applicant/complainant as a party, i.e., respondent No.2 in the present case. The application was allowed, and the applicant/complainant was ordered to be impleaded as respondent No.2. The amended memo of parties was taken on record, ensuring the complainant's involvement in the legal proceedings. Issue 2: First petition for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving allegations of fraud and cheating under IPC. The petitioner filed a petition seeking anticipatory bail in a case where serious allegations of fraud and cheating under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were made against them. The case involved the petitioner's alleged involvement in a scheme where a significant amount of money was transferred under the guise of filing GST returns, leading to substantial financial losses for the complainant company. The petitioner, a married lady, claimed innocence and stated that the amount received was a friendly loan from her sister, who was an employee of the firm involved. The court, considering various factors including the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation and the partial return of the transferred amount, granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to deposit a specified amount with the trial court and cooperate with the investigating agency. The court also allowed the anticipatory bail application, emphasizing that the payment made by the petitioner did not imply guilt or a final settlement between the parties. The court clarified that the bail order did not prejudice the rights of either party and did not impact the ongoing trial proceedings. This detailed analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the legal judgment, addressing the issues involved and the court's decisions regarding the application for impleading the complainant and the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a complex case involving allegations of fraud and cheating under the IPC.
|
