9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 31.12.2019 which is evident from the Annexure-P1 being the orders. The petitioner as I have been found in the earlier order that he is a Chartered Accountant by profession and with the similar contention he has averred that he is no way connected with the instant case. The petitioner has been arraigned as an accused in this case under Section 69 read with Section 132(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on the allegation that in connivance with the other accused persons, namely, Sanjay Kumar Pandit, Nagendra Kumar Dubey alias Sandip Dube, and Mr. Vijay Rajpuriya along with various other persons he allegedly issued GST Invoices without any supply of the goods or services to anybody on commission basis causing loss of more t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GST Act, 2017 with the intention to evade tax or any of the offence enumerated in Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017. Accordingly, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for his release on bail in connection with this case now pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Alipore, 24- Parganas (South). It woud appear from the Order-sheet of the Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Alipore, 24- Parganas (South) vide order dated 19.02.2020 that case has been posted on 3rd March, 2020 for production of the accused from custody and for consideration of charge. Mr. K.K. Maity learned counsel for the opposite party-Union of Inddia reference to a decision in case of State of Tamil Nadu Vs. S.A. Raja [2006(1) SCC (Cri.), 58] to submit tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the National Economy and National Interest. Again a reference to a decision in case of Mukesh Jain Vs. CBI reported in (2010) 1 AD (Delhi) 443 : (2010) 88 AIC 319 : (2010) 1 JCC 417 : (2010) 1 LRC 18 is made to the observation in paragraph 9 thus- "9. It is true that the petitioner has been in custody for more than eight months and the chargesheet has already been filed, but considering the huge amount of public money, being retained by him, his having been in custody for eight months by itself would, in the facts and circumstances of this case, not entitle him to grant of bail at this stage. The economic offences having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to be on the wrong side of law. Unless it is done, we will not be able to check the growing tendency to adopt dubious and illegal means, to get rich overnight so as to be able to enjoy all those luxurious of life, which now are available in abundance, courtesy liberation and globalization of our economy. I do not wish to suggest that the time already spent in jail is not a relevant consideration in the matter of grant of bail or that the economic offenders should not at all be enlarged on bail. Of course, we cannot keep anyone in prison for an unreasonably long period. But, how much period spent in jail would by itself entitle an under trial prisoner to bail, would depend upon the facts of each case, including the amount of public funds i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
