2023 (5) TMI 1183 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of regular bail - evasion of GST - Forming of a network of fake firms and defrauding the state exchequer. - availment of fraudulent Input Tax Credit - HELD THAT - Since the grant or refusal of bail lies in the discretion of the Court the discretion is to be exercised with regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. However, bail is not to be denied to satisfy the collective sentiments of a community or as a punitive measure. Therefore, broadly speaking (subject to any statutory restrictions contained in Special Acts), in economic offences involving the IPC or Special Acts or cases triable by Magistrates once the investigation is complete, final report/complaint filed and the triple test is satisfied then denial of bail must be the exception rather than the rule. However, this would not prevent the Court from granting bail even prior to the completion of investigation if the facts so warrant - Given the fact that the petitioner was arrested on 13.03.2021 and is in custody ever since in a case where the maximum sentence that could be awarded was 05 years, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required, more so when his co-accused have been granted the concession of regular bail vide order dated 31.08.2022. The further incarceration of the petitioner would be wholly unnecessary. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the aforementioned petitions are allowed and the petitioner-Amrinder Singh son of Gurnam Singh is ordered to be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, concerned which is at liberty to impose any stringent conditions that it deems appropriate - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The petition for grant of regular bail under Section 439 Cr.PC in a case involving tax evasion under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 and Punjab Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.

Detailed Judgment:

Issue 1: Allegations and Investigation Details
The investigation uncovered a scheme where individuals colluded to create fake firms, evading taxes totaling Rs. 122.28 Crores. The group used common identifiers across multiple firms to facilitate fraudulent activities, including fake invoices and non-existent inward supply chains. The accused were found to have roles in registration, cash withdrawals, and overall tax evasion, leading to a case for arrest of seven individuals.

Issue 2: Bail Application and Legal Arguments
The petitioner sought bail citing the release of similarly situated co-accused and the ongoing trial process. The State did not dispute the bail granted to other accused but emphasized the seriousness of the allegations as a reason for denial of bail. The court considered the discretion in granting bail based on individual circumstances and the nature of economic offenses.

Issue 3: Bail Decision and Conditions
Given the petitioner's prolonged custody, the court deemed further incarceration unnecessary, especially when co-accused had been granted bail. The court highlighted that denial of bail should be an exception rather than the rule in economic offenses. The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail, subject to conditions set by the Trial Court, including surrendering the passport and refraining from influencing witnesses. Any attempt to interfere with witnesses could result in the cancellation of bail.

Conclusion
The court allowed the petitions for bail, emphasizing the need to balance individual rights with the seriousness of the allegations. The petitioner was granted bail with specified conditions to ensure compliance with legal proceedings and prevent interference with the case.