9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulting in loss of ₹ 11,80,95,716/- to the Government exchequer, this is not a fit case considered to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners and that the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected. Petition dismissed. - CRIMINAL PETITION No. 1275 OF 2020 - - - Dated:- 10-3-2020 - JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI J. Petitioner Advocate: P. Vamsheedhar Reddy Respondent Advocate: Public Prosecutor TG ORDER : 1. The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail, in the event of their arrest, in connection with the proceedings in F.No.INV/DGGI/ WRU/GST/04/2019-20/PF (Legal) on the file of the Special Judge for Economic Offences, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2. Hear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per the statement of A-1, it is revealed that A-1 is managing entire affairs of the organization and he is responsible for evasion of GST on the taxable services provided by them without issuing any invoices. Further, he had deliberately evaded GST without raising invoices/bills resulting in huge loss to the Government. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged, they are in no way connected with the offences and that they are falsely implicated in the above crime. It is further submitted that even if the entire complaint is taken into consideration, no offence is made out against the petitioners for the offence under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017. The 1s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are released on anticipatory bail, there is every possibility of manipulating the records. He relied on the order of this Court in Crl.P.No.5324 of 2019 dated 15.11.2019 and also the order of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.4764 of 2019 and Batch dated 18.04.2019. 6. A Division Bench of this Court in its order, dated 18.04.2019, in W.P.No.4764 of 2019 and batch, observed in para Nos.52, 54 (2), 58 and 61 as under: 52. But, to say that a prosecution can be launched only after the completion of the assessment, goes contrary to Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017. The list of offences included in sub-Section (1) of Section 132 of CGST Act, 2017 have no co-relation to assessment. Issue of invoices or bills without supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n those seeking anticipatory bail. On the other hand, the jurisdiction under Article 226 has to be sparingly used, as cautioned by the Supreme Court in Km.Hema Misra (cited supra). 61. In view of the above, despite our finding that the writ petitions are maintainable and despite our finding that the protection under Sections 41 and 41-A of Cr.P.C., may be available to persons said to have committed cognizable and non-bailable offences under this Act and despite our finding that there are incongruities within Section 69 and between Sections 69 and 132 of the CGST Act, 2017, we do not wish to grant relief to the petitioners against arrest, in view of the special circumstances which we have indicated above. 7. In view of the aforesaid o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
