9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r release on regular bail in case FIR No. 657 dated 24.10.2020, registered at Police Station City Sirsa, under Sections 406/409/419/420/465/467/468/471/120B IPC. 2. (i) FIR is based on a complaint dated 11.12.2019, made by Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Ward No. 5, Sirsa to the Superintendent of Police Sirsa, informing that a firm by the name of M/s. J.C. Enterprises (proprietor Sh. Madan Lal) was found involved in claiming bogus refund on account of input tax credit. During the assessment period 2011-12, this dealer fraudulently obtained refund of Rs. 29,29,035/- by using false and fabricated documents, including sale invoices of cigarettes regarding interstate sales to Rajasthan, VAT D-3 forms showing the sale of cement/tiles, and 'C' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 173 CrPC has already been presented in the Court after conclusion of investigation and that co-accused Gopi Chand Chaudhary has already been allowed bail by this Court in CRM-M-49998- 2023 on 09.10.2023. Still further, it is contended that for violation of the provisions of the Act, the provisions of Indian Penal Code, 1860 [for short 'the IPC'] cannot be attracted. Ld. Counsel referred to CRM-M-23662- 2016 decided on 16.05.2023 titled Ashwani Kumar Vs. State of Punjab. It is submitted further that CRM-M-39311-2023 has already been filed to quash the FIR on this ground and this Court has granted ad interim relief vide order dated 30.10.2023 (Annexure P5). Contention in CRM-M-52902-2023 4. On behalf of petitioner-Ashok Sukhij ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any of the petitioners absconding from justice and so, they be allowed regular bail, inasmuch as co-accused Gopi Chand Chaudhary has already been allowed bail by this Court. 6. Opposing the bail petitions, ld. State counsel contends that petitioners committed economic offences causing loss to the State exchequer to the tune of more than Rs. 29 lakhs; that though the allegations make out violation of the provisions of the Act, but at the same time, there is nothing which precluded the police to investigate a crime under the provisions of IPC, in case allegations leveled in the FIR make out the commission of offences under the IPC. Ld. State counsel contends that fraud and fabrication of documents on the part of petitioners is writ large, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the matter, where an attempt is made to evade the Tax and the registration of FIR in such like matters is totally an abuse of the process of law. 9. However, this Court notices that in the absence of factual matrix in Ashwani Kumar's case (Supra), Pritpal Singh's case (Supra) and Dilawar Singh's case (Supra), it is not possible to comment as to whether in those cases also, there were allegations regarding bogus refund of input tax credit based on false and fabricated documents. In these circumstances, it will be a debatable issue as to whether the provisions of IPC shall be applicable to the present case or not. 10. At the same time, it is not disputed even by the ld. State counsel that FIR pertains to the bogus refund of input tax cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
