TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1097X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed of the SLP observing that the State shall make endeavour to complete the investigation within three months. In the case at hand, the applicant was arrested only on 30.09.2023, the matter is still under investigation. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, allegations made against the applicant, evidence collected by the prosecution, seriousness of the offence and further considering the law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sandeep Goel, present case is not found to be a fit case to enlarge applicant on bail. This application filed under Section 439 of CrPC is rejected. - HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE For Applicant : Mr. Kartikey Samtani, Advocate. For Non-applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1007G1Z2), M/s Gurunanak Sales (22DLPPG940M1ZT) and M/s Ganpati Transport Trading (22AAJHN9563Q1ZD). The aforementioned firms were operated and managed by applicant. Applicant was thereafter arrested on 30.09.2023. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant was arrested and thereafter after completion of investigation, complaint application after according sanction under Section 132(6) of the CGST Act, 2017 is filed before the Court of competent jurisdiction, no further interrogation of applicant is necessary and therefore applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. He places reliance upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ratnambar Kaushik vs. Union of India passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [2020SCC OnLine Cal 531], Ajaj Ahamad vs. State of Odisha [2021(53) G.S.T.L. 390 (Ori.)], Sanjay Dhingra vs. Directorate GST Intelligence [Cri. Misc. M-50256/2019, Punjab and Haryana High Court], P.V. Ramana Reddy vs. Union of India [2019 SCC OnLine TS 2516; Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4430/2019], Union of India vs. Sapna Jain [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4322-4324/2019], Santosh Kumar Gupta vs. Union of India [2021(52) G.S.T.L. 258 (Ori.), Orrisa High Court], Sandeep Goyal vs. Union of India [Bail Application No. 1521/2020, Rajasthan High Court; Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1803/2020], Basudev Mittal vs. Union of India [MCRC No. 3919/2022, Chhattisgarh High Court; Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 8128/2022]. 5. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate shall make endeavour to complete the investigation within three months. In the case at hand, the applicant was arrested only on 30.09.2023, the matter is still under investigation. Further considering the nature of offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant. The economic offences having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds, the alleged crime appears to have been committed with calculated design profiting himself regardless of the consequences to the community. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Nimmagadda Prasad v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2013) 7 SCC 466 has observed in para 24 as under : While granting bail, Court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
