Back
GANESH RAM MEENA
Manoj Kumar Jain S/o Late Shri Anil Kumar Jain – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through Special PP – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner under section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. DGGI/INV/GST/911/2024-Gr-H-O/OADG- DGGI-ZU-Jaipur for the offence punishable under section 132(1) (a), (f) (h) and (l) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the Act of 2017’).
2. Facts of the case are that the respondent-Union of India through Senior Intelligence Officer filed a detailed complaint under section 132 of the Act of 2017 in the Court of learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences, Jaipur Metro-II, on the basis of which an FIR No. DGGI/INV/GST/911/2024-Gr-H-O/OADG-DGGI-ZU-Jaipur for the offence punishable under section 132(1)(a), (f) (h) and (l) of the Act of 2017 was registered. The gist of the complaint is as under:
3. Counsel appearing for the accused petitioner submitted that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused petitioner is triable by First Class Magistrate and the maximum punishment is 5 years. Counsel also submitted that the offences in regard to evasion of tax upto Rs.5 crores is bailable and the person against whom there are allegations of creating fake firms has not been
The court established that personal liberty must be protected and that the gravity of the offence alone cannot justify denial of bail.
Economic offences, especially involving large sums and serious allegations, require stringent scrutiny of the accused's conduct, including attempts to abscond and prior criminal history, to deny bail....
The presumption of innocence applies; bail may be granted in non-violent, compoundable offences when trial delays are anticipated.
Economic offences involving serious tax evasion and tampering with evidence warrant denial of bail due to their potential to impact public revenue.
Any offence under this Act may, either before or after institution of prosecution, be compounded by Commissioner on payment, by person accused of the offence, to Central Government or State Governmen....
The court established that in cases of economic offences, while the gravity of the allegations is significant, the presumption of innocence and the nature of evidence must also be considered when dec....
The court emphasized the requirement of reasons to believe and sound reasons for arrest under Section 69 of the CGST Act, and the need to balance personal liberty with the seriousness of economic off....
Bail cannot be denied based solely on pending investigations of co-accused; each case must be evaluated individually, considering the right to a speedy trial as a fundamental right.
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
