IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Bansal, J.
Directorate General of Gst Intelligence - Appellant
Versus
Jitender Kumar - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 4528 of 2023 and Crl.M.C. 4529 of 2023 & Crl.M.A. 17313 of 2023 (Stay)
Decided On : 19-01-2024
GST Fraud - Anticipatory Bail - Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) - Section 132(1)(b) and (c) - Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 70 of the CGST Act
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), sought setting aside of the order granting anticipatory bail to the respondent accused Jitender Kumar, who was involved in a GST fraud case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that Jitender Kumar was not the main player in the fraud, had clean antecedents, and had cooperated in the investigation. The court sustained the grant of anticipatory bail to Jitender Kumar and dismissed the petitions filed by DGGI.
Issues: The issues revolved around the grant of anticipatory bail, compliance with bail conditions, and the involvement of the accused in the GST fraud.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of Section 438 of the CrPC could be invoked for granting anticipatory bail, and the accused's cooperation in the investigation and clean antecedents were considered in sustaining the bail. The court also emphasized the importance of complying with bail conditions.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitions filed by DGGI and confirmed the anticipatory bail granted to Jitender Kumar, with a warning to comply with the bail conditions and appear pursuant to summons issued by DGGI.
JUDGMENT
1. CRL.M.C.4529/2023 has been filed by the petitioner Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) seeking setting aside of the order dated 2nd February, 2023, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, granting anticipatory bail to the respondent accused Jitender Kumar.
2. CRL.M.C.4528/2023 has been filed by the petitioner DGGI seeking setting aside of the order dated 24th April, 2023, whereby the learned ASJ has dismissed the petition filed on behalf of the DGGI seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the respondent on 2nd February, 2023.
3. Brief facts, as agitated by the DGGI, are as follows:
3.1. The officers of DRI Gandhidham and DGGI, acting on intelligence, intercepted 21 containers carrying smoking mixtures from Mundra Port, Gujarat on 3rd October, 2022. The samples taken therefrom were sent to the Central Revenues Control Laboratory (CRCL), Kandla, wherein it was revealed that the aforesaid smoking mixture was a spurious product and not fit for human consumption.
3.2. Investigation was started and summons were issued to the exporter company, M/s Harsha International. However, the proprietor of M/s Harsha International, the present respondent, Jitender Kumar, did not comply with the aforesaid summons.
3.3. During search of the registered premises of M/s Harsha International, it was revealed that no business activity relating to export was being carried out and a kirana store was being operated by the father of Jitender Kumar, from the registered place of business.
3.4. During the course of investigation, it was found that M/s Radiant Traders, the manufacturers of smoking mixtures, had supplied the smoking mixture to M/s Harsha International. Upon search, it was found that no business activity was being conducted from the registered premises of M/s Radiant Traders and no goods or plant or machinery was found at their premises.
3.5. Subsequently, statement of the proprietor of M/s Radiant Traders, Manish Goyal, was recorded under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), wherein he stated that no smoking mixtures have been supplied by his firm to M/s Harsha International.
3.6. The co-accused Manish Goyal was arrested on 25th November, 2022 under the allegations of having committed offences under Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act.
3.7. The co-accused Manish Goyal preferred a bail application before the learned ASJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, which was allowed vide order dated 21st December, 2022 and he was released on regular bail.
3.8. Jitender Kumar preferred an anticipatory bail before the learned ASJ, which was granted vide order dated 2nd February, 2023.
3.9. The DGGI moved an application before the Sessions Court, seeking cancellation of the aforesaid anticipatory bail on the grounds of violation of the conditions mentioned therein, which was dismissed by the learned ASJ vide order dated 24th April, 2023.
4. Senior Standing Counsels appearing on behalf of the DGGI have made the following submissions:
I. The Sessions Court could not have granted anticipatory bail to Jitender Kumar in view of the recent order dated 17th July, 2023 passed by the Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 42124213 of 2019 titled State of Gujarat v. Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer, wherein it was observed that provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) are not applicable to cases involving offences under the CGST Act.
II. Jitender Kumar is involved in a serious economic offence relating to evasion of Goods and Services Tax (GST) to the tune of Rs.218 crores.
III. In the present case, Input Tax Credit has been shown to be received on the basis of procurement of cigarettes which have been shown to be used as raw material to manufacture smoking mixture. It is pertinent to note that the prices of cigarettes are very high when compared to loose tobacco. Therefore, the aforesaid method is neither economically viable nor technica
The court emphasized the importance of considering the accused's cooperation in the investigation and clean antecedents in granting anticipatory bail, and highlighted the significance of complying wi....
The judgment established that involvement in a large-scale economic fraud and attempts to violate bail conditions can render an accused ineligible for anticipatory bail.
Bail should not be cancelled without supervening circumstances that are not conducive to a fair trial, and cogent reasons are required to justify the cancellation of bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of previous permission from the Commissioner to prosecute under the GST Act and the discretion of the court in granting anticipator....
Anticipatory bail granted as petitioners cooperated with investigation, lack of prior offenses, and no necessity for custodial interrogation.
Cancellation of anticipatory bail requires supervening circumstances; mere allegations of involvement and compliance with investigation negate cancellation requests.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a liberal interpretation of anticipatory bail provisions, considering the principles of Article 21 of the Constitution and the nature ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while bail can be revoked if relevant factors are not considered, there must be compelling circumstances for its cancellation. The court empha....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a determination of tax liability before arrest and prosecution, and the importance of assessing the nature and gravity of the accusati....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.