SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Raj) 1985

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
SAMEER JAIN, J.
Sandeep Singhal - Petitioner
Versus
Directorate General of Central Goods And Services Tax Intelligence, Jaipur – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14063 of 2023
Decided On : 08-12-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Mayank Taparia & Sharad Kothari, Mr. Amol Vyas.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sandeep Pathak with Mr. Akshat Sharma.

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.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 439 - Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Sections 132(1)(c)(f) and 137 - Bail application filed by accused-applicant arrested under GST Act for alleged tax evasion of Rs. 11 crores - Offence triable by magistrate and charge sheet filed - Co-accused granted bail on different facts - No criminal antecedents of applicant - Bail granted on furnishing bond. (Paras 1, 2, 5, 6)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail - Factors include nature of offence, criminal history, and likelihood of influencing witnesses - In this case, applicant's status as primary breadwinner and absence of criminal antecedents favored bail. (Paras 2, 5)

ORDER :

(Sameer Jain, J.)

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with File No. DGGJ/ INT/ INTL/289/2022- Gr-E registered at Directorate General of Goods & Services Tax Intelligence, Jaipur Zonal Unit under Section 132(1) (c)(f) read with Section 132(5) of the CGST Act, 2017.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant, who has no criminal antecedents and who is the primary bread earner for his family, is wrongly implicated in the present matter. It is submitted that the offence alleged is triable by magistrate, as per Section 134 of CGST/RGST Act and charge sheet has already been filed. It is further submitted that the Commissioner (GST) is also empowered to compound the offence under Section 137 of CGST/RGST Act. It is further highlighted that all the witnesses in the case are government officials and therefore there is no likelihood of the present applicant influencing them. Further, one of the co-accused has also been enlarged on bail vide order dated 13.04.2022 in S.B. CRLMB No. 3399/2022. Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied upon following judgments:

    a.) Ratnambar Kaushik v. Union of India: (2023) 2 SCC 621

    b.) Lakshya Agarwal v. DGGI Jaipur Zonal Unit: 2022 (3) TMI 546 (Raj).

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the Revenue has opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the applicant has evaded tax amounting to approximately Rs. 11 crores. It is contended that such white collar financial crimes adversely affect the financial health of the country. It is further submitted that case of co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail, is on entirely different facts and circumstances. Learned counsel for the revenue has relied upon following judgments:

    a.) Tarun Kumar v. Assistant Director, ED: 2023/INSC/1006

    b.) Manish Sisodia v. CBI: 2023 SCC Online SC 1393

4. Heard and considered.

5. Considering the arguments advanced by both the sides, considering that matter is triable by magistrate; that applicant has no criminal antecedents; that charge-sheet has been filed; that offence alleged is compoundable in nature; that co-accused is enlarged on bail, and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record, but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the present bail application.

6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Sandeep Singhal S/o Shri. Shiv Shankar shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top