9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s given up. Further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose and will be violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India including the right to speedy trial, and is against the principle Bail is a rule, jail is an exception as elucidated in the judgment of Apex Court in DATARAM SINGH VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR. [ 2018 (2) TMI 410 - SUPREME COURT] . Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring speedy trial is not consistent with Article 21. While deprivation of personal liberty for some period may not be avoidable, period of deprivation pending trial/appeal cannot be unduly long. The Apex Court in ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY VERSUS R.S. NAYAK [ 1991 (12) TMI 274 - SUPREME COURT] observed that Right to Speedy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tation, Kundli was received from Prashant Kadyan, Excise Taxation Officer-cum-Proper officer (GST), Sonepat, Ward No. 2 Office of Dy. Excise Taxation Commissioner (ST), Sector-27, near Mapsko City, HUDA Building, Sonepat. The complaint was directed against M/s Bawa International, now Jasper Trading House, Office No.5, Ground Floor, Main GT Road, Kundli, Sonepat whose proprietor is Rakesh Sharma accused/applicant who has played fraud with the state exchequer in connivance with numerous of inward and outward suppliers. Further that said firm had obtained registration certificate under the Haryana Goods Service Tax Act, 2017 R/W CGST Act 2017 against GSTIN 06AYEPS1722RIZY with registration date 01.10.2018 through auto approval mechanism. Upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submit that the petitioner has undergone actual custody of 11 months and 26 days and there is one another case registered against him, in which he is on bail. Learned counsel submits that the trial is triable by the Magistrate and has placed reliance on the orders passed in Ashutosh Garg vs. Union of India, SLP No. 8740 of 2024 decided on 26.07.2024, Ratnambar Kaushik vs. Union of India, SLP No. 10319 of 2022 decided on 05.12.202 2, Ashish Gupta and another vs. State of Haryana, CRM-M-40083 of 2022 decided on 09.09.2022 and Asha and others vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-43836 of 2022 decided on 31.03.2022. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. As per the custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e established during the course of the trial. Admittedly, the charges have been framed and only three prosecution witness have been examined till date. Therefore, this Court is of the view that further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose. 9. Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, lest it may prejudice the trial, the present petition is allowed and order dated 07.02.2024 is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
