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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 3111

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RAJBIR SEHRAWAT, J.
Yash Pal Jindal – Petitioner
Versus
State of UT, Chandigarh – Respondent
CRM-M-7501 of 2023
Decided On : 07-08-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate; For the Petitioner
Ms. Vasundhara Dalal, APP, UT, Chandigarh.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Bail pending trial - Petitioner sought bail in FIR under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120B and 471 IPC, claiming involvement was concocted and fabricated - Also argued that petitioner not required for further investigation and in custody since 10.12.2022 - Respondent affirmed petitioner's involvement in GST refund fraud scheme - Court allowed bail, emphasizing lack of necessity for further investigation. (Paras 2, 3, 4)

(B) Right to Bail - Fundamental principles include presumption of innocence and the necessity for detention; not justified when further investigation is unnecessary. (Paras 2, 4)

Table of Content
1. the basis of the bail petition under the law. (Para 1)
2. arguments for bail based on lack of involvement. (Para 2)
3. counterarguments regarding the petitioner’s involvement in fraud. (Para 3)
4. court's decision to grant bail pending trial. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.PC. seeking bail pending trial in case FIR No.385 dated 13.12.2019 under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 120B and 471 of IPC, registered at Police Station Central Sector-17, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1).

2. It is submitted by the counsel for the Petitioner that the case against the petitioner is totally concocted and fabricated. The petitioner is not involved in the crime at all. Even as per the story of the prosecution, petitioner is alleged to have issued fake bills in lieu of 5% commission of GST refunds claimed by the various traders through these bills. The petitioner is not alleged to have got any benefit directly from the GST department or any other government department in the transactions. Petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2022 and he is not required for any further investigation. Hence, the petitioner deserves to be released on bail pending trial.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the UT, Chandigarh, being instructed by Inspector Shiv Charan, submits that the petitioner is involved in a heinous crime. She further submits that petitioner is part of the group of the fraudsters, who managed to grab a huge amounts on account of GST refunds. It is further submitted by the counsel that the petitioner is involved in one more case of similar nature. However, it is not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2022 and that the petitioner is not required for any further investigation.

4. In view of the above, but without expressing any further opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

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