TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred the money in his wife s account and, subsequently, from her account, it comes to the applicant s account. It is a kind of act, which effects the economy of the country. Added to it is the non-cooperative attitude of the applicant during enquiry. Having considered the gravity of offence and its implications, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail - the instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be dismissed. The anticipatory bail application is dismissed. - Hon ble Ravindra Maithani, J. For the Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate For the Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate ORDER HON BLE RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J. (ORAL) The applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in view of Section 132 (4) of the Act. (iii) Before arresting the applicant, the respondent no.2 has to take permission from the Commissioner under Section 69 of the Act, which it did not take even after 6 months, when the petition was filed in the Court. It is argued that the respondent no.2 has no reason to believe that the arrest of the applicant is necessary. 4. In support of the contentions, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the principles of law, as laid down in the case of Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) Vs. Lupita Saluja, [2021] 128 Taxmann.com 373 (SC). It is argued that, in fact, in this case, an order of the Hon ble Delhi High Court, passed in Bail Application No.319 of 2021 and Crl.M.B. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was also detected that, in fact, the articles were shown transported in some vehicles, which had very less load bearing capacity, but huge quantity was transported through them. It was also detected that certain vehicles, on which the articles were shown to have been transported, were, at the relevant time, spotted at different States through Fastag payment. 7. The objection filed by the respondent no.2 gives much details of it. Brief facts of the case, as given by the respondent no.2 in the complaint filed against Surendra Singh are as hereunder:- During the scrutiny of firms under Section 61 of UKGST Act, 2017, the change in mode of tax payment came to light. It was found that some firms which were earlier paying tax through cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the State, huge transactions were made by the applicant, through his firm. 9. It is also argued by learned counsel for the respondent no.2 that after protection having been given to the applicant, he did not cooperate with the enquiry. He evaded the questions. He denied answers to various questions. 10. In the matter pertaining to the Act, the provision of anticipatory bail may very well be evoked. This has been confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of P.V. Ramana Reddy Vs. Union of India, (2021)2 SCC 784. In the cases cited on behalf of the applicant, as such no absolute rule is laid down that in the matters pertaining to the Act, custodial interrogation is not required. Therefore, it cannot be said that anticipatory bai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which the accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 the court should consider with even greater care and caution because overimplication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern; (viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors, namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused; (ix) The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant; (x) Fri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laim ITC. In their objections, the respondent no.2 has given categorical details of such dubious transactions and has also submitted as to how in one day, the money has routed in different accounts. The applicant transferred the money in his wife s account and, subsequently, from her account, it comes to the applicant s account. It is a kind of act, which effects the economy of the country. Added to it is the non-cooperative attitude of the applicant during enquiry. He was asked as to whether he knows one Rohil Enterprises (Question no.66). He did not reply to it. He said, I will reply it on the next date of hearing. 16. Having considered the gravity of offence and its implications, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
