TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 874X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner pending trial in complaint case No. CHA/ 170/2023 dated 27.03.2023 for offence punishable under Section 132(1)(a) (b)(c) and (i) of Punjab Goods and Services Act, 2017 and Central Goods and Services Tax Act read with Section 69(1) of Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, pending in the Court of Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. 2. The precise allegations levelled against the petitioner have been culled out in Para No. 12 of the reply filed by way of affidavit of Shalinder Singh IO-cum-State Tax Officer, Jalandhar-2, dated 16.11.2023 which read as under : 12. That the contents of the Para. 12 of the petition are denied on the pretext that a lot of incriminating evidence have been recovered and any area is investigated more and more evidence proving the fraudulent nature of the accused/petitioner come to the fore. More firms have come into the notice in which the accused/petitioner have been found committing the offence as stated in the complaint, and a lot of more areas are being investigated. Till filing the complaint the amount defrauded by the accused/petitioner was more than ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of 'State through CBI vs. Amaramani Tripathi, reported as 2005(8) SCC 21', holding that: xx xx xx It is well settled that the matters to be considered in an application for bail are (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the charge; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail ( see Prahlad Singh Bhati vs. NCT, Delhi 2001 (4) SCC 280 and Gurcharan Singh vs. State (Delhi Administration) AIR 1978 SC 179) . While a vague allegation that accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses may not be a ground to refuse bail, if the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or if there is material to show that he will use his liberty t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y differ from one case to another. Therefore, it is not advisable on the part of the court to categorise all the offences into one group and deny bail on that basis. Suffice it to state that law, as laid down in the following judgements, will govern the field:- Precedents P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2020) 13 SCC 791: 23. Thus, from cumulative perusal of the judgments cited on either side including the one rendered by the Constitution Bench of this Court, it could be deduced that the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial. However, while considering the same the gravity of the offence is an aspect which is required to be kept in view by the Court. The gravity for the said purpose will have to be gathered from the facts and circumstances arising in each case. Keeping in view the consequences that would befall on the society in cases of financial irregularities, it has been held that even economic offences would fall under the category of grave offence and in such circumstance wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. But at the same time, right to bail is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of the community against the accused. The primary purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve the accused of imprisonment, to relieve the State of the burden of keeping him, pending the trial, and at the same time, to keep the accused constructively in the custody of the court, whether before or after conviction, to assure that he will submit to the jurisdiction of the court and be in attendance thereon whenever his presence is required. x xxx xxx 46. We are conscious of the fact that the accused are charged with economic offences of huge magnitude. We are also conscious of the fact that the offences alleged, if proved, may jeopardise the economy of the country. At the same time, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigating agency has already completed investigation and the charge-sheet is already filed before the Special Judge, CBI, New Delhi. Therefore, their presence in the custody may not be necessary for further investigation. We are of the view that the appellants are entitled to the grant of bail pendin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ution. That indeed is one and a significant end of the spectrum. The other end of the spectrum is equally important : the recognition by Section 482 of the power inhering in the High Court to prevent the abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice is a valuable safeguard for protecting liberty. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 was enacted by a legislature which was not subject to constitutional rights and limitations; yet it recognised the inherent power in Section 561-A. Post- Independence, the recognition by Parliament [Section 482 CrPC, 1973] of the inherent power of the High Court must be construed as an aid to preserve the constitutional value of liberty. The writ of liberty runs through the fabric of the Constitution. The need to ensure the fair investigation of crime is undoubtedly important in itself, because it protects at one level the rights of the victim and, at a more fundamental level, the societal interest in ensuring that crime is investigated and dealt with in accordance with law. On the other hand, the misuse of the criminal law is a matter of which the High Court and the lower courts in this country must be alive. In the present case, the High Court c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mehta (supra) wherein the entire law has been discussed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in para No. 18 in Dipak Shubhashchandra Mehta's case (supra) has held as under: - 18. The Court granting bail should exercise its discretion in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course. Though at the stage of granting bail, a detailed examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case need not be undertaken, there is a need to indicate in such orders reasons for prima facie concluding why bail was being granted, particularly, where the accused is charged of having committed a serious offence. The Court granting bail has to consider, among other circumstances, the factors such as a) the nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence; b) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant and; c) prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charge. In addition to the same, the Court while considering a petition for grant of bail in a non-bailable offence apart from the seriousness of the offence, likelihood of the accused fleeing fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that a man shall be considered innocent until he is found guilty. If such power is recognized, then it may lead to chaotic situation and would jeopardize the personal liberty of an individual. This Court, in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar Vs. Rajesh Ranjan- (2005) 2 SCC 42, observed that under the criminal laws of this country, a person accused of offences which are non-bailable, is liable to be detained in custody during the pendency of trial unless he is enlarged on bail in accordance with law. Such detention cannot be questioned as being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution, since the same is authorized by law. But even persons accused of nonbailable offences are entitled to bail if the Court concerned comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against him and/or if the Court is satisfied by reasons to be recorded that in spite of the existence of prima facie case, there is need to release such accused on bail, where fact situations require it to do so. 10. In Sanjay Chandra's case (supra) also the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered the entire law on the subject. 11. I am conscious of the fact that serious all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioners are entitled to grant of bail pending trial on stringent conditions in order to allay the apprehension of the investigating agency. It is not necessary to canvass and go into the details of various other issues canvassed by learned counsel for the parties and the cases relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioners in support of their contentions. I have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case. 12. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, without commenting on the merits of the case, the incarceration suffered by the petitioner, the maximum punishment prescribed under the law and the fact that investigation already stands concluded, and in view of dictum of law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil's case (supra), the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 13. Needless to say the Trial Court shall be at liberty to impose any other condition in accordance with law. Surrender of passport by the petitioner shall be a pre-condition for grant of bail. Apart from that the petitioner shall also file an undertakin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
