9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 831X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, the First Bail Application was withdrawn. The most surprising part is that after withdrawal of the First Bail Application, Second Bail Application was preferred just after 5 days; but again he has not disclosed about the criminal history as well as the fact about his conviction in another case of similar nature. This Court is not convinced with the argument as advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, particularly, when the applicant has not approached with clean hands to the trial Court while seeking bail. The question is if he has moved the First Bail Application, wherein the objections were called and the objections were filed by disclosing the criminal history of the applicant, then why he has not pressed the First Bail Application - the present applicant made all possible efforts to procure the bail by misrepresenting as well as by suppressing material facts. Such a conduct of the applicant, seeking regular bail without disclosing the material facts, about the criminal history and the facts about his conviction clearly reveals that he procured the bail by way misrepresentation and in such an eventuality, the same Court was right in cancelling the bail. While can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Service Tax Act/The Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. 3. Before filing the said complaint, the competent authority, Commissioner State Tax, Uttarakhand in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Section 132 (6) of the Uttarakhand GST Act, has accorded sanction for prosecution. 4. The allegations as alleged in the complaint is that two complaints were received on 26.02.2021 and 12.08.2021 with the allegation that huge number of shell firms have been registered and operated by various persons in Jaspur area of District Udham Singh Nagar and these persons have been indulged in issuance and selling of fake invoices of wood swan / timber to different buyers within the State as well as outside the State on commission basis without causing actual supply of goods, due to which they caused loss of revenue of Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax and Central Goods and Services Tax to the State Government as well as to the Government of India. 5. On the said complaint, a preliminary investigation was launched by Special Investigation Branch (SIB), State Tax, Rudrapur and an extensive data analysis was done using E-way bill portal and GST back office portal and simultaneously a se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on being WPMS No. 730 of 2023 through his father against the sealing order but the same was dismissed by the High Court on 17.03.2023 with a direction to the applicant to present before the Special Investigation Branch within 48 hours. 10. Thereafter, the house of the applicant was searched on 15.05.2023 and during search huge number of documents, and devices relating to fake firms which includes: cell phones, SIM cards, blank and filled invoices, pre-signed cheque books, unsigned cheque books and cheque leafs, bank pass book, bank letters, sign boards of different fake firms, stamp of fake firms, E-way bills, IDs of different person, copy booklets of fake firms, Mandi samiti passes along with some digital instruments like credit cards, ATM cards, currency counting machine etc were recovered and seized. The seizure includes, 5 cell phones, 01 currency counting machine, 17 stamps of shell firms, various GST tax invoices issued from fake/ shell firms, PAN cards, copy of 789 loose e-way bills related to different shell firms etc., operated by applicant in the name of dummy persons i.e. Roshan Enterprises, RS Timber, Himalayan Trading Company etc., Bilty booklets of GT road lines Brigh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal No. 287 of 2013. 14. After receiving the objection, the said application was withdrawn by the applicant on 22.02.2024. Thereafter, Second Bail Application No. 359 of 2024 was preferred by the applicant on 27.02.2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar for seeking regular bail and the same was allowed on 05.03.2024. 15. Thereafter, the complainant/respondent No. 2 preferred a Miscellaneous Application, registered as Miscellaneous Application No. 87 of 2024 for the purposes of seeking cancellation of bail of the applicant which was granted to him by order dated 05.03.2024. 16. In the said application several grounds have been taken and one of the ground which is reflected from para 6 of the application is that the applicant was earlier convicted in the same nature of allegations i.e. a frequent tax evader and is a habitual offender of tax frauds and convicted for rigorous imprisonment of 3 yrs for keeping and using of fake stamp of different departments for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 472 of IPC pursuant to the order dated 11.12.2013 passed in Criminal Case No. 1774 of 2012. Apart from this, it is also contended in the application that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection in the First Bail Application on 07.02.2024. He further submits that after withdrawal of the First Bail Application on 22.02.2024 immediately after five days on 27.02.2024 the Second Bail Application has been moved but again he has not disclosed about criminal history and procured the bail by suppressing the material facts by withholding the same intentionally and also by misleading the Court. 24. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that admittedly at the time of filing of Second Bail Application, again the applicant has not disclosed about the criminal history though this fact was very well within his knowledge since the criminal history of the applicant was disclosed by the department in first bail application. He submits that, in fact without disclosure of the material as well as facts about the criminal history the present applicant procured the bail; therefore, since the bail was obtained by way of misrepresentation and by concealing material facts, therefore, the learned Sessions Judge rightly cancelled the bail of the present applicant. 25. The learned Additional Advocate General for the State placed reliance on a judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ession of bail during trial [ Dolat Ram v. State of Haryana, (1995) 1 SCC 349 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 237]. To put it differently, in ordinary circumstances, this Court would be loathe to interfere with an order passed by the court below granting bail but if such an order is found to be illegal or perverse or premised on material that is irrelevant, then such an order is susceptible to scrutiny and interference by the appellate court. 27. As per the arguments, as advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, two issues are required to be decided. The first issue is whether the present applicant procured the bail by way of misrepresentation and suppression of material facts, and the second issue is whether the learned Sessions Judge is right in cancelling the bail of the applicant after gone through with the merit of the case. 28. So far as the first issue is concerned, i.e. whether the bail has been procured by the present applicant by way of misrepresentation and suppression of material facts. To examine this issue, one fact is undisputed that earlier the applicant filed a First Bail Application and admittedly, there was no disclosure about the criminal history as well as the fact tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essed the First Bail Application. Furthermore, even if he has not pressed First Bail Application, why he has not disclosed the criminal history in the Second Bail Application. Thus, this aspect clearly reveals that the present applicant made all possible efforts to procure the bail by misrepresenting as well as by suppressing material facts. Such a conduct of the applicant, seeking regular bail without disclosing the material facts, about the criminal history and the facts about his conviction clearly reveals that he procured the bail by way misrepresentation and in such an eventuality, the same Court was right in cancelling the bail. 33. So far as the next issue is concerned that while cancelling the bail of the present applicant, whether the same Court can touch the merit of the case. To examine this issue, this Court also examined the allegation which appears to be serious in nature and the present applicant is certainly indulged in committing the economic offences due to which he caused a huge revenue and tax losses to the government exchequer, amounting to more than Rs. 20,00,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Crores Only). 34. Now-a-days, the economic offences are serious in nature. Sin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
