Back
N. S. SHEKHAWAT
Tejpal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Director General of G. S. T. Intelligence, 51D, D-Block, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
N.S. Shekhawat, J. (Oral)
The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant him a regular bail in complaint case No. COMA/49077/2023 dated 30.09.2023 titled as "Senior Intelligence Officer v. Tejpal Singh @ Teji etc.", under Section 132 of the GST Act, 2017 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is neither the proprietor nor the operator nor controller of the Firm M/s Eren Traders Ludhiana. Still further, none of the bank accounts or PAN number connected with the said Firm is in the name of the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner was an employee of co-accused Lovish Kapoor and has nothing to do with the allegations made in the complaint. Learned counsel further contends that even the documents had been fabricated and manipulated, so as to involve the petitioner in the present case. Further, the petitioner never issued any bill to any party nor even handed over any bill to any person. Even, no payment was ever collected by the petitioner from any person nor any transfer was made by him from his account. Learned counsel further contends t
Indefinite custody is unjustified when allegations are unadjudicated; bail granted to the petitioner.
Indefinite incarceration is unjustified even in serious allegations; bail granted when continued custody serves no useful purpose.
The court established that personal liberty must be protected and that the gravity of the offence alone cannot justify denial of bail.
The court ruled that continued custody of the petitioner was unnecessary given the nature of the evidence and the duration of detention, allowing for bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
Accused granted bail due to prolonged custody, lack of evidence, and the trial's lengthy nature, emphasizing the maintainability of the FIR will be adjudicated in trial.
Detention without substantial evidence and the principle of equal treatment in bail applications necessitate granting bail, especially when co-accused are already released.
The court emphasized the necessity of substantial evidence for serious charges under the GST Act and the accused's right to a fair trial.
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
