Back
SUDESH BANSAL
Mohit – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER :
Mr. Sudesh Bansal, J. - Instant bail application has been filed by petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with Case No. DGGI/Inv/INTL/40/2023-Gr-N-O/o DD-DGGI-RU-UDAIPUR registered at Office of the Additional Directorate General, DGGI Zonal Office, Jaipur for the offence(s) under Sections 132(1)(b)(c) (f)(k) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and read with Section 132(5).
2. It has been argued by the learned counsel for petitioner Mr. Siddhartha Ranka that apart from the petitioner, other two persons named Rajat and Ishu were also implicated in the present case, however, as far as petitioner-Mohit is concerned, he was employed in the firm of Rajat and Ishu. Since the charge-sheet against rajat and ishu was not filed in time, they have been released on bail granting benefit of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C by the trial Court itself. Petitioner is in custody since 12.07.2023 (except for five days during which he was granted interim bail on account of death of his grand-mother); the maximum punishment for the alleged offence does not travel beyond 5 years of imprisonment and fine; there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner, therefore in such totality 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 court granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. due to the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents and the nature of the offence being compoundable.
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
