TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 541X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be decided on its own facts and circumstances and the merits of the case. Every case has different facts and allegations and while deciding the bail applications, the Court has to keep the nature of evidence and accusation in mind and then decide the bail applications accordingly. Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Nimmagadda Prasad vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [ 2013 (5) TMI 920 - SUPREME COURT] has held While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner and evidence collected by DGGI, seriousness of the offence and further considering the fact that the bail application of the similarly placed accused Anil Kumar has been rejected by the Co-ordinate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o.2299/2022) decided on 06.04.2023. 8. Shri Mohammed Ali Akram Khan Vs. Union of India and Ors. (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.13860/2022) decided on 06.04.2023. 9. Vineet Gupta Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.7162/2023) decided on 20.07.2023. 10. Saurabh Jindal Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.14791/2022) decided on 16.12.2022. 11. Vikas Bajoria Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.17349/2022) decided on 06.01.2023. 12. Abhishek Singhal Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.14211/2021) decided on 11.11.2021. 13. Laxman Chaudhary Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.16422/2021) decided on 06.10.2021. 14. Vineet Gupta Vs. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.7162/2023) decided on 20.07.2023. 2. Per contra, learned counsel for the Union of India opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that when the statements of the petitioner were recorded under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017, it was revealed that the petitioner has created and operated 294 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce (for short, DGGI ) Jaipur Zonal Unit (for short, JZU ) regarding issuance of fake invoices of menthol without supply of underlying goods in the office of the petitioner. Thereafter, detailed investigation was conducted by DGGI and during investigation, it was found that many of the fake firms issuing invoices to M/s Kaizan Organics Pvt. Ltd. are being run by one and the same person, i.e, the petitioner Ashutosh Garg. Then his statements were recorded under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 and it was revealed by him that he created 181 fake firms just to issue fake invoices involving Input Tax Credit (for short, ITC ) of Rs.679 Crores for the purpose of passing inadmissible ITC. The petitioner created/operated fake firms with fake IDs for the purpose of passing inadmissible ITC fradulently. During investigation, it was found that the number of fake firms created and operated by the petitioner were increased from 181 to 294 and accordingly, the fake ITC amount increased from Rs.679 Crores to Rs.1,032 Crores. 5. During investigation, this fact also came on the record that one Anil Garg alias Anil Kumar proprietor of M/s. Anil Trading Company purchased and operated some of the fake ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ismissed. 7. Once the bail application of the similarly situated accused Anil Kumar has been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.02.2024, there is no reason or occasion available with this Court to take a different view looking to the allegation of causing huge loss of Rs.10,32,91,88,876/- to the Government and such act of the petitioner amounts to misuse of the public exchequer. 8. A common man of this Country is paying all kinds of taxes including CGST and SGST to the Central and State Government for development and building of the Nation and the State but the person like the petitioner is causing obstruction in the development of the Nation as well as the State by creating fake firms and causing huge loss of Rs.10.32,91,88,876/- to public exchequer. Such act of economic offence committed by such accused person like the petitioner, is required to be dealt with a different approach in the matter of bail. 9. The economic offence, having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public exchequer, needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offence, affecting the economy of the Nation as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words reasonable grounds for believing instead of the evidence which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner and evidence collected by DGGI, seriousness of the offence and further considering the fact that the bail application of the similarly placed accused Anil Kumar has been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is not inclined to release the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
