9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 496X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the offence(s) under Sections 132 (1) (b), (f), (h), (j) & (l) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been wrongly implicated in this case. He is behind the bars since 03.08.2022. Charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that offence against the petitioner is triable by Magistrate, compoundable and having maximum punishment of 5 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that before arrest, no summon or demand notice was given to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Mohammad Shadab Kadri is kingpin in this case. Petitioner has nothing to do with the all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No.18825/2021 decided on 05.02.2022; (12) Naresh Chandra Jajra Vs. Union of India in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1914/2022 decided on 25.02.2022; (13) Sanjeev Jain Vs. Union of India in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3608/2021 decided on 31.05.2021; (14) Gaurav Kumar Aanchaliya Vs. Union of India in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3624/2019 decided on 13.05.2019; (15) Chandu @ Chandra Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2381/2021 decided on 16.02.2021; (16) Pradeep Kumar Bansal Vs. Union of India in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12093/2020 decided on 04.11.2020; (17) Saurabh Kumar Jain Vs. Union of India in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2695/2021 decided on 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 200 Crores for granting bail. So, if this court directs the petitioner to deposit loss of input tax credit of nearing Rs.88.33 Crores, then, respondent shall not have any objection for granting bail to the petitioner otherwise the bail filed by the petitioner be dismissed. 5. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent has placed reliance upon the following judgments: (1) Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors. in Miscellaneous Application No.1849/2021 in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5191/2021; (2) Nimmagadda Prasad Vs. CBI reported in (2013) 7 SCC 466; (3) Yashik Jindal Vs. Union of India in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14792/2022 decided on 16.12.2022; (4) Lalit Goyal Vs. Union Of India in S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. Considering the contentions put-forth by the counsel for the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail with a condition to deposit Rs.5 Crores by the petitioner before the respondent Department 'under protest'. 9. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Shri Mohammed Ali Akram Khan Son Of Mohammed Iqbal Khan be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
