Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.
Ashutosh Garg S/o Sh. Krishna Gopal Garg – Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 548 of 2024
Decided on : 06-03-2024
Confessional Statement - Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 70, Section 136 - [Section 70, Section 136] - The court discussed the admissibility of the petitioner's confessional statement recorded under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 and its relevance, as well as the severity of the alleged offences under Section 132(1)(b)(c)(f)(j)(l) of the CGST Act, 2017. The court also considered the gravity of economic offences and the principles for granting bail in such cases.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail after being accused of creating and operating fake firms to evade taxes under the CGST Act, 2017.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the bail application, considering the gravity of the economic offence, the severity of the allegations, and the rejection of a similar bail application for a co-accused.
Issues: Admissibility of confessional statement, severity of alleged offences, and principles for granting bail in economic offences.
Ratio Decidendi: 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.
Final Decision: The bail application was rejected, and the trial court was urged to expedite the trial.
JUDGMENT :
1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been impleaded as accused in the instant case on the basis of his confessional statement recorded under Section 70 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, “the CGST Act, 2017”). Counsel submits that the aforesaid statement of the petitioner is not admissible in evidence, at this stage, as the same is not relevant, as there was no adjudication of the allegations on merit in view of Section 136 of the CGST Act, 2017. Counsel submits that the petitioner has been arrested in the instant case on 02.11.2023 and after his arrest, complaint has been filed against him for the offences punishable under Section 132(1) (b) (c) (f) (j) (l) of the CGST Act, 2017 on 30.12.2023. Counsel submits that the maximum punishment for the above alleged offence is five years and the same is triable by the Court of Magistrate (First Class). Counsel submits that looking to the period of incarceration of the petitioner and looking to the fact that the alleged offence is triable by Court of Magistrate, indulgence of bail be granted to the petitioner. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the following orders/judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court as well as this Court in the following cases:-
2. Rishabh Jain Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr. (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.10718/2023) decided on 04.12.2023.
3. Ravindra Kumar Vs. Union of India and Anr. (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.2937/2022) decided on 08.02.2023.
4. Nikhil Gupta Vs. Union of India and Anr. (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No.17510/2022) decided 10.02.2023.
5. Shubham Jindal Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.11285/2023) decided on 06.10.2023.
6. Babulal Qazi Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.12786/2022) decided on 13.02.2023.
7. Mohammad Shadab Kadri Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.2299/2022) decided on 06.04.2023.
8. Shri Mohammed Ali Akram Khan Vs. Union of India and Ors. (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.13860/2022) decided on 06.04.2023.
9. Vineet Gupta Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.7162/2023) decided on 20.07.2023.
10. Saurabh Jindal Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.14791/2022) decided on 16.12.2022.
11. Vikas Bajoria Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.17349/2022) decided on 06.01.2023.
12. Abhishek Singhal Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.14211/2021) decided on 11.11.2021.
13. Laxman Chaudhary Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.16422/2021) decided on 06.10.2021.
14. Vineet Gupta Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.7162/2023) decided on 20.07.2023.
2. Per contra, learned counsel for the Union of India opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that when the statements of the petitioner were recorded under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017, it was revealed that the petitioner has created and operated 294 fake firms and has evaded a tax of Rs. 1,032 Crores. Counsel submits that when the investigation was conducted by the investigating agency, this fact came on the record that one co-accused Anil Kumar was also in conspiracy with the petitioner and a separate complaint has been filed against the said co-accused Anil Kumar bearing No.DGGI/ INV/122/2023-Gr.-F-O/o ADG-DGGI-ZU, Jaipur for the offences punishable under Section 132(1) (b) (c) (f) and (l) of the CGST Act, 2017. Counsel submits that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has already rejected the bail application of the co-accused Anil Kumar (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.15833/2023) vide order dated 19.02.2024. Counsel submits that not only the
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.
The court ruled that economic offences require a stringent approach in bail matters, emphasizing the gravity of allegations and evidence against the accused.
The court established that personal liberty must be protected and that the gravity of the offence alone cannot justify denial of bail.
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
