Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA, JJ.
Ashutosh Garg – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 8740 of 2024
Decided On : 26-07-2024
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Section 132(1)(b), (c), (f), (j) and (l) – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439[Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 483] – Denial of bail – Allegation of setting up certain fake firms and fraud in payment of input tax – Petitioner has been in custody for nearly nine months – Bearing in mind that offence carries a maximum punishment of five years of imprisonment and period of custody already undergone, it is not appropriate to keep petitioner languishing in jail any further – Petitioner shall be released on bail, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by Trial Court. (Paras 2 and 5)
Facts of the case:
Petitioner has been denied bail in connection with a complaint registered against him for offences punishable under Section 132(1)(b), (c), (f), (j) and (l) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017. Allegation is that petitioner has set up certain fake firms and is involved in a fraud relating to payment of input tax.
Findings of Court:
Petitioner shall accordingly be released on bail, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by Trial Court.
Result : Special Leave Petition disposed of.
ORDER :
1. The petitioner has been denied bail in connection with a complaint registered against him for offences punishable under Section 132(1)(b), (c), (f), (j) and (l) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017. The allegation is that the petitioner has set up certain fake firms and is involved in a fraud relating to payment of input tax.
2. The petitioner was arrested on 2 November 2023 and has been in custody for nearly nine months.
3. Notice was issued by this Court on 19 July 2024.
4. We have heard Mr. Talwant Singh, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the Union of India.
5. Bearing in mind that the offence carries a maximum punishment of five years of imprisonment and the period of custody already undergone, we do not consider it appropriate to keep the petitioner languishing in jail any further. The petitioner shall accordingly be released on bail, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court.
6. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of.
7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
The court held that bail may be granted in economic offences if the accused has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody for a considerable time, despite the seriousness of the allegations.
The court established that personal liberty must be protected and that the gravity of the offence alone cannot justify denial of bail.
The severity of economic offences warrants a different approach to bail applications, and each application must be decided based on its own facts and circumstances.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
