9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 888X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 167(2) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 24.2.2021 (Annexure P-1), passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, subject to his fulfilling certain conditions including executing bail bonds/surety bonds etc., but continues to be confined in prison, despite modification of the conditions in his favour, by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide impugned order dated 15.7.2021 (Annexure P-2) and being aggrieved against the amount of bail bond and surety bond etc., he has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The facts in brief leading to the petition are that the petitioner was arrested on 24.12.2021, as he had allegedly caused wrongful loss of Rs. 15.91 crores to the complainant, i.e. Directorate General of GST Intelligence by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s imposed vide order dated 24.2.2021 was given up by the accused. The petitioner is aggrieved against this order dated 15.7.2021 (Annexure P-2) passed by the revisional Court as well, because the conditions modified are still extremely stringent and beyond the capacity of the petitioner to meet with the said requirement who continues to be in custody, therefore, this petition has been filed by the petitioner to invoke inherent powers of this Court. Notice of this petition was issued on 6.8.2021 to the respondent and in response, the respondent-complainant has filed its reply through Sanjeev Singh, Assistant Director, Directorate General, GST Intelligence. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that though the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #39;ble High Court of Gujarat in Neeraj Ram Kumar Tiwari through His Father Ram Kumar Rameshwar Tiwari vs. State of Gujarat, Special Criminal Application No.5777 of 2020. The prayer is vehemently opposed by Mr. Sourabh Goel, learned counsel for respondent-complainant who has argued that the order passed by the revisional Court is justified considering the nature of offence allegedly committed by the petitioner. He submits that the economic offence involving huge amount would be a relevant consideration while releasing the accused on bail and in the present case, the petitioner has fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit of approximately Rs. 15.91 crores, therefore, the modified conditions directing him to furnish bail bond for a sum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicial principles, but where the prosecution is unable to conclude the investigation in a stipulated time, an indefeasible right is accrued to the accused to seek regular bail by virtue of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. contained in Chapter XII, Code of Criminal Procedure. The said concession is extended to the accused because of failure of the investigating agency/prosecuting agency to apprise the accused regarding the charges, behind his/her detention, and in that eventuality, the allegations contained in the FIR or the complaint become insignificant. Here, it may be noticed that at the time of release, the accused is conditioned to execute bonds and furnish surety and the amount of bond is fixed by the Court/Officer granting bail to the accus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not disputed by Mr. Sourabh Goel, learned counsel that the statutory period for filing the charge-sheet/complaint is over and the needful is yet to be done. It was fairly conceded by Mr. Goel, learned counsel that the right accrued to the petitioner under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is not disputed, however, he opposed the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that in order to safeguard the interest of the complainant, heavy surety amount alongwith cash deposit has been rightly ordered by the trial Court. This Court does not find any merit in the argument advanced on behalf of the complainant as the petitioner cannot be allowed to remain in jail indefinitely, because it would mean punishment to the accused before charges against him are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ture, it is needless to observe that every accused is presumed to be innocent till the prosecution brings home the guilt of the accused, and further the grant of bail is a general rule, whereas denial is an exception. Thus, in view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order dated 15.7.2021 (Annexure P-2), passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, calls for further modification.
Resultantly, the petition succeeds and it is ordered that the accused shall be released on bail subject to his executing bond of Rs. 10 lakhs and two sureties of the like amount, and further the other condition of furnishing a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs is set aside. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
